AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD H EARING RECORD
NAM E OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FffiST MIDDLE INJTIAL)	GRADE	AFS/SSAN
(b) (6)	(b) (6)
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
COUl'iSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZAT ION or COllNSF.L
n:s	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x

x x x x
ISSUES	A92. 15	INDEX N"UMBER	A67.00	EXRTBITS SUBMITIEDTOTHE BOARD
A92.01	I ORDER APPOfNT ING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATIO N FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOT IFICATION
4 BR IEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXH!BITS SUBMITTED AT TlME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE H.EARJNG

ll"ARIN(.; OATt:	CASE  NUMBER

24 Feb 2015	FD-2014-00418
APPLICANT'S ISSUE A)l[l THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AlTACHED i\IR FOR.CE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAi..£

Case heard in Washington , D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board,the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR.

(b) (6)

lNDORSEMENT	DATE:  3116/20 15
TO:	FROM :

SAFfMRBR

SECRETARY Of nlE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL A I R roRCE OISCBARCE RtVIJ';\V BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 CQMMAN"D OR,EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AI'O, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AfO, l\fD 20162..7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previou s

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00418	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance  before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
ISSUE:  The appl icant received a General discharge for Misconduct

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsi bi lity to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption, to  include evidence submitted by the applicant. The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.

The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits asjustification  for upgrade.  The DRB noted  that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on 30 January  2003) that he understood  he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of these benefits to the applicant; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropr iety which would warrant an upgrade.  A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.
After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to j ustify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

Applicant admits that very bad decisions led to his administrative discharge.  The record indicates the applicant received a General discharge from the Air Force for Miscond uct.  Upon review of the record, the Board was unable to find any documentation regard ing the discharge.  Due to lack of evidence and supporting documentation to explain the discharge, the Board concludes that the misconduct was a significant departure from the conduct expected of all military members.  The Board relies on the presumption  of regularity and finds the characterization was appropriate.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief