AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAMEOFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIODLE INITIAL)
(b)(6)	GRAOE	AFSN SSAN	
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   REVIEW	
CONSEL	NAIE or COUNSEL AND OR ORCAN17-\TI011'	ADDRESS AND OR ORC \NIZATION Of COUNSEL	
YES	No			
	x			

MEMBER SITTI  'G	VOTE or rn r, BOARO	
	IION	OEN	UOTHC'	OTHER	DENY	
(b)(6)						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
ISSUES
A94.55	INDEX NUID<R
A67.50	t:X IIIBI'I S SlJ6MITH:D TO TIIE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPO INTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISC"llARGE	
		3 LETrER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO Tl IE BOARD	
			ADD ITION1\L EXII IBll S SI 113Mrl l'ED A I llMl:OF l'ERSONAL Al'l'l:Al{ 1\NCI:	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE lll'ARING	

llE1\RISC OATE

OZ Apr 2015	CASE NUMBER

FD-ZOJ 4-00667			
APPLIC'MffS ISSIIE AND Tl IE BOARD'S DFCISIO'IAL RATION1\LE AR.£ OISCl	'SSEDOJ\ Tl1F . nA<'llEO AIR FORCE DIS('llARGH REVlFW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIOAI H	
Case heard  i n  Washington,  D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board , the right to a personal appearance wi thJwithou t counsel, and the right to su bmi t an	
appl ication to the AFBCMR.

(b) (6)

l.IJ\ I c.,;      J"'f.LV I =>

TO:

FROI:

SAF/MRBR
550 C' STRCET WEST,SUITE -10
RANDOi.PiIAFB. TX 78150-174!

Sf.O ETARlOf TlI( AIR fOR<'E PCRSOi'NEI. C0l1NCIL

AIR FORCE lllSCllARGt: Rt:\'11:\\ BOAHI)
lf-3 (0\IMANO OR. El::WING .•lRO fl...OOR
\NORE\\ $ AF6. :\ID 20762·7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(ff-Y2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	Ct\SE NUlBER

FD-2014-00667	

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 contai ns avai lable pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant recei ved a General discharge for Misconduct - Pattern of Misconduct

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibi lity 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 regulari ty in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presu m ption, to i ncl ude 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 for failing to maintai n sufficient funds yet still writi ng checks; one Vacation of non- jud icial punishment for failing to refrain from weari ng night vision goggles while operating a motorized vehicle; four Letters of Reprimand for improper pol itical and social conduct in regard to host nation relations, wi llfu l ly displayed insubord inate conduct to an NCO, failing to follow orders and instructions both written and verbal, and undermini ng leadershi p and put others heal th at risk by storing three bottles of uri ne in a rucksack directly disobeyi ng orders; one Letter of Counseling for bei ng 60 days delinquent on his government tra vel card.

The mem ber contends that his discharge was based on a false accusation. After a thorough review  of the records, the Board opined that the applicant's overall miscond uct  during  his  term  of  enlistmen t  was  the reason for his discharge and found no evidence to warrant an  upgrade of the d ischarge characteri zation. A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an i nequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substanti ve req uirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the appl icant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing find ings, the Board fm1her concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should rema i n unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief