AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAi\IEOF SERVICE l\IEi\JBEr{ (L1\ST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRAD:	1\ FSN/SSAN
(b)(6)	(b)(6)
TY PE  GEN	x	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	I	RECORD REVIEW
COUNSl'L	NAME OF COU!<SEL ANO OR ORGANIZATIOI'	ADDRESS AND OR ORGA1"17.\TION or COUNSf L
\'ES	No	(b)(6)	(b)(6)
x

(b)(6)

VOTE:OF1'HEBOARO
MEMBER SITTING	llON	GEN	UOTllC'	OTl lER	DENY
X+#

X+# X+# X+#

I SSlES	A94.01	lDEX NU IBER	A67.10	l!:Xll lllrlS SUB.VllTIll:OTO TllE llOARO
l ORDER A PPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLIC' ATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCJ IARGE

X+#

3	LElTER OF NOTIFICATION	 	
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL Fll.F COUNSEL'S RELEASETO Tl IE BOARD
ADDn IONAL EXIIIBIrs SUBMITTED AT rlME OF
l'EKSUNAL 1\J'Pl:AR 1\Nn:
!"APE RECORDING OF l't.RSONAL APPEARANCF IIEARING

llE,\RINC 0;-\TE	(\ SENl•\.lllER

10 Mar 2015	FD-2014-00666
APPL ICANT s ISSUE AND nmoOARD·s DEC'ISIO AI. RATIONALF ARE DISCllSSEDON TllEATTAC"llW AIR FORCE DISCllARGE REVIEW BOARD D['(fSIO'<AL RATIONALE.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board , the right to a personal appearance with/wi thout counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

+ RE Code

ll CHA  GE REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY

(b)(6)

INDORSEM;t l\'T	DATE: 3123/2015	l
TO:	FROI:

SAl'IMRBR

St:CRF.TAR'OP Tiit AIR FOR( E PERSO.SNEL C'Ol1N(ll..
\IRFORCE OIS('H,\llCE R[\'I[\\' BOARD
550 C: STREET WEST, SUITE -10	1"5(0MMA'<irJ OR.t:£ \H,G, JRl) f'LOOR
RA>JDOLPIIAFB.1X   78150-47-12	\NORt  \\SAf8.IO  20762·100 1

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

A I R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD  DECISIONAL RATIONALE	C \SE 'ILIBER

FD-20t 4-00666	

GENERA L:   The applicant  appeals  for an upgrade of the discharge  to  Honorable; a  change to the reason and authority for the d ischarge and to change the re-en l istment code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board DRB, with counsel, at And rews A FB on March  10, 2015.  The following witness also testified on the applicant's behalf: (wife) (b) (6)
(b) (6)

The following additional exhibits were subm i tted at the heari ng: Exhibit #4: Applicant 's Contention s
Exhi bit #5: Character reference letters

The attached brief conta ins available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors lead ing to the discharge.

FINDI NG : The Board grants the requested relief.

ISSUE: The applicant recei ved a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disci plinary Infractions

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under i ts responsibility to exami ne the propriety and equity of an applicanf s d ischarge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge i f such change is warranted. I n reviewing d ischarges, the Board presumes regu l ari ty i n the conduct of governmental affairs un less there is substantia l cred i bl e evidence to rebut the presumption, to  include evidence submitted by the applicant.  The Board com pleted a thorough  review of the circumstances that  led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensu re the discharge met the pertinent standards of equ i ty and propriety. The applicant's record of service included three Article I 5s, three Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling. The member's misconduct included sleeping on post; fai lure to remain alert on duty; damagi ng government property; fai lure to compl y wi t h dress and  appearance  standards;  insubord inate conduct towards an 1   CO and lack of regard to security pol ice req uirements.

The applicant contends that his d ischarge was inequita bl e because i t was too harsh.  I le accepted
responsibility for his actions i n regards to the minor d i scip l inary infraction s, but believes that his challenges duri ng h is upbri nging played o part with his behavior wh i le his post-service conduct shed's fu1iher  l ight that such misconduct does not accuratel y reflect who he is.  I li s post service accompl ishments i nclude becoming a Washi ngton D.C. police officer, a youth guidance counselor, and a youth physica l t ra i ning coord inator.
A fter taking into account of the applicant" s statements and a thorough review of the record, the DRB determi ned there is sufficient evidence to warrant an upgrade.  Although the Board docs not condone applicant·s misconduct, and though the discharge was proper and equ itable at the t ime, the applicant's pre­
scrvice upbri nging, coupled with his exemplary post-service conduct provid es a greater understand ing of his misconduct at the time. Based on the compdling statem<.:nts and supporti ng documents, the appl icant's age
and ed ucation at the time, the natu re of the misconduct, and the appl icant's post-service cond uct, the Board fel t the misconduct was an more an aberration than an ind icator of warran ting nega t ive service characterizat ion.  As such, the Board grants the upgrade of discharge to Honorable; a change to the reason and authori ty for the discharge and to change the re-enlistment code.

CO CLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes  that  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  chc procedura l and substantive req uirements of the discharge regulation, was withi n the discretion of  the discharge authority. that the applicant was provided full ad mi nistrati ve due process, and that at the time of discharge, the service charactcri .1.ation was equitable.