AIR FORCE DI SCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SE:RVJCE M EM BER (LAST, FIRST M IDDLE INITIA L)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
(b) (6)	(b) (6)
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	N,\ME OF COUl'iSELAND OR ORCANIU\T ION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGA1'17.ATION Of COUNSEi,
\'ES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEM BER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x
x x
ISSUES	A94.05	I NDEX NUMBE R	A69.00	EXHIBITS SlJBMITIEO TO THE  BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIGW OF DISC!IARGl3
3	LETTER OF NOTlflCATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO Tiffi BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDrNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Feb 2015	FD-2014-00547
APPLICANT"S ISSLE AND THE OOARD"S DECISIONAL RA'nONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON 11-IEA1TACHED AIR FORCE OISC'HARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIO'<AI, RATION ALF.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant 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)

l 'l>ORSEMENT	DATE:  3/16/2015
TO:	FROM:

SAF/M RRR

SECRETARY OFTILE A IR FORCE PERSOliNEL COUNCIL AIR fOKCE OISCl1AKCt KEVlt:W llOAKO
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COIMAND DR. EE WINC, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLl'f-1 AfB,  TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB. MO 20702-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00547	

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 - Failure in Alcohol Abuse Treatment

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 . The Applicant's record of service included two Letter's of Reprimand, and one Article 15 for failure to refrain from underage drinking, possession of alcoholic beverages while underage, and failure to refrain from consumption of alcohol while enrolled in ADAPT.

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh, and that his service prior to an accident that caused him to be removed from his AFSC was good. He states that his issues with alcohol
were due to his treatment not addressing his pain and emotional state so he was self-medicat ing with alcohol. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, two Letters of Reprimand for misconduct.  The DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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 justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedura l 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