AI R FORCE DlSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAS'f , FrRST M!l)OLE TNITTA L)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE  GE   I	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAM£ OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZ. TION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGMllz.ATlON OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
MEM BER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
I	x
x
x x
ISSUES	A94.SS	LNDE.X  NUMBER	A67.90	EXHIBITS SUBMITJ'ED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPL!CATION FOR REVIEW Of DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTlflCATlON
4  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL  EXHlBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

H£ARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Jun 2015	FD-2014-00499
AJ>PWCAN'J..S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON 11lE ATrAOIED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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 application to the AFBCMR .

(b) (6)

 	INDORSEMENT	-

DATE: 71812015	 	

TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVJt;W BOARD
5.50 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND OR. EE WING. JRO FLOOR
RANDOLPH  AFB.  TX  78150-4742	ANORCWS A F8, MO 2076?·7001

Af HQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00499	
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 applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility 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. In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to 10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board. The applicant's record of service included two Article  15s, four Letters of Reprimand and three Letters of Counseling.   The misconduct  included receiving a DUI; failing to go to duty on time on two separate occasions (4x's); failing to abide by standards set by supervisor ; failing to comply with numerous established procedures; failing to utilize PRP reporting procedures after witnessing and recording two fellow airman being hypnotized during show at state fair and failing to report to mandatory  medical appointment (2x's).

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh due to it being based off of one isolated incident. After a review of the records, the Board found the applicant's claim of one isolated incident without merit. The DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken for the eight previous incidents, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.

Applicant also stated that he was in a car accident that resulted in death and it was a very traumatic incident for him. After a review of the records and advice from the mental health specialist, the car accident occurred in May 2012 and the DRB was unable to find evidence that the applicant had any mental health issues documented or that would directly contribute to the misconduct. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. 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 ju stify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

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.

Inview 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