AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM E OF SERVI CE ;\I EMBE R (LAST, FIRST l\l l DDLE IN ITIA L)	Clv\ DE
(b)(6)
TYPI-: GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
COUNS L	NA 11:Or \Ol<NSt:l. AND OR ORCA7'117 1TI ON	A ODRl'.SSAND OR ORCANl7 \TION Or COUNSEL
VES	No	(b)(6)	(b)(6)
x
VOTE Of TllE BOARD
MEMBER SITTING	llON	GEN	UOTl lC'	Ol l lER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x

x x
x
I SSllt S	A94.0S	l\l)t:   ·'I HIU(	A67.90	Xlll BITS Sll6.\lfff £1) TO Tll E BOARD
I ORDFR APPO INTING HIE BOARD
2	APPLICA J'JON FOR REVIEW OF DISC !IARGE
3	l.r nrn OF NO I I FICA.I ION
4  BR IEF OF PERSONNEL Fil.[
COlJNSEU> REI.EASE TO Tl 11:BOARI)
ADDI rlONAI FXll IBll S SUBMI I 11:.DAT I li\11= OF
l'l·RSONAI 1\l'l'l.Al<ANC ·1.
·1 APF RECORDI NG OF PERSON 1\I APPb\RANC E I !EAR ING

ll E.IRh\G DATE	(' \ SI'1 l!\IHl-'.K

21 Apr 20 15	F0-2014-00573
APPLICA'IT s l   l l A' IJ l l l t OOAl{O'S 01nSIOi'IAI R.MIOi'IAIJO ARF l)l$CllSSLDON Tl!E ATIACHED AIR fORC'E DISl llARGEREVIEW BOARD DE("ISIONAL RATIO ALr

Case heard  i n  Washi ngton,  D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a persona l appearance with,without coun sel, and t he right to submit an appl ication to the AFBCM R.

(b)(6)

INl>ORSEMF:NT	OATE:   .i/23/20 15
ro:	IRO \l:
AFIMRBR	St:CIU:'l'Atl\ Of' 1 111-:1\I R fORCF. PF:ll.""0'1''- Cl. (Ol :-.< II .
AIR FORCE lllSCllMIG£ R;t V !E\\ BOARll
S SO C Sl RFET \\'ES.I, SUI 11 -10	l!\.  (0;\ IM.AM) l>K. ft; W l  C.JKI} 1- 1,()()K
RANDOLPll AH. I X 78150--1742	\ NORt:\\ S 1\ f.ft. MO ?t762·70-0 1

A FH Q FORi\I 0-2077, JA N 00	(EF-V2)	Pre\'ious

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00573	

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

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

The attached brief contains available perti nent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

ISSUE:  The applicant received a General discharge for Pattern of Misconduct - Conduct Prejud icial to Good Order and Discipline

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under i ts responsibi l i ty to exam ine 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 watTanted. I n reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmenta l affairs unless there is substantial cred ible 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 perti nent standards of equity and prop1iety. The applicant's record of service included two Article  15s,  one  Vacation  of  Non-Judicial Punishment, two Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseli ng and three Records of Counseling. His misconduct included failure to go on t ime (6x);  misplacement of Personal Protective Eq uipment; underage possession of alcohol; failure to go to mandatory fitness testing  appointment;  underage  consu mption  of alcohol and  incapacitation  for proper  performance of duties.

The applicant submitted no issues regardi ng the i neq ui ty or improp1iety of his discharge. The applicant does submit that he bel ieves he was misdiagnosed with aluminum poisoni ng and was part of the force shaping program prior to bei ng discharged.  After a thorough review of the records, the Board found no evidence to substantiate the applican t's claim of aluminu m poisoni ng or force shaping.  The Board opined that through the administrati ve actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  They found the seriousness of the wi l lful misconduct offset any posi tive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.
The Board  reviewed  the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or ineq ui ty to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.
A discharge is upgraded only if the appl icant and the Board can establ ish that an ineq uity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  The ORB was unable to justify 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 procedura l and substantive requ irements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authori ty, 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 remai n unchanged.

Attach ment: Exami ner's Brief