AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OFSERVICEMEMBER(LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

X	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	No
x

ADDRESSAND OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VOTE  OFTHEBOAJtt?

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DBNY

X * X *

x•

ISSUES

A94.0S

INDEX NUMBE.R	A67.10

X *
EXHJBITS SUBMITI.ED TO THJ ' OARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEFOF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIJvffi OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARJNGDATK	CASENUMDl!.R

05 Oct 2016

FD-2014-00557

"'..  .. ·

APPu:s ISSUEANDTHB89'.SDIJV.TlONALll ARBDISCUSSED ONTHEl<TTACHED AlR FOR.C6DIS<RUGE iEVIEW BOAR.I) DECISIONAi. RAT\ONALB.	•    S' :·'	. . .
•	•   I  o
Case heard in Washington,D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the nght to a personal appearancewith/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

RE Code - *

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 CSTREETWEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPHAFB, TX78150-4742

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCl!ARGER.llVIE\V BOARD 1535COMMAND DR, EE WlNC, JRD FLOOR
ANDRE"SAFB, MD 2762-7001

.. . !" :.

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00557	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable and to change the reenlistment code.

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 finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION: 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 one Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included: being late for work (6x); failing to go to appointed place for duty; and violating a lawful regulation by wrongfully storing sexually explicit materials on an assigned government computer.

The board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions.  The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it too harsh.  He claims that his sleep issues were a major factor in regards to his misconduct.  He also denies responsibility for the Article 15 that he received.  After a review of the records, the Board surmised that the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The DRB concluded that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claim of inequity or a nexus between his sleep issues and the misconduct.  The negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  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 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.

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	

I.