-	---	-
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD IJ EARINC RECORD
XA \1F. OF SEHVl(.'l \1E.\-18Ul (LAST. FlltS r \llllOLE l'\l'I IAI.)	(;!UL>.

(b) (6)
-	..··-·	 	

TYf>E GEN	I	PERSONAL   APPEARANCE

..x..,

I	RECORD     REVIEW

(V. IJSS'tL
'L	'•
x

\.-'II.Of COi \ML \\lJOk 0M( ,\\l7A110\	'\Ol)M[ i;S, ANIJ () 0Kt A 1''11.t\'l 10'OI·('Ot '\iSrl.

---	--	-

··-··	-

(b) (6)
>-

VOTE OF TH£ BOARD
M EMBER  srn1c	·-·  --	----·-·-	·-··-· ·..
UON	C!EN	lJOTllC	OTllF.R	DF.N Y
I	x•

-

X*
-
X*
-	---.

I	X*

r-	----	- ---	-
x•
;
·	&.[	A94.55	;.,.-A4900	EXJllBITS SUBTO THE BOARD
I < JJ{l)f:R ·\l'POINTINC; 11IE BOi\RO
2   AP l'l.l('ATl( lN fOR REVIFW OF DISCH:\IH il
I
-·	....-

-

;	3 I.I flloR 0I NC> l'lFICA1'1UN
4   BRlf   Of f'f'RSO'JNl:I. Fil f'
( l)lJf\ISf l  '!> RFI EASI:I{) n llo BOA RD
f-
,\DUI rlO'JA I   l XlllOITS SlJBl\-1rl TF.l> ,\ I'  I !Ml " OF Pl:RSUAL     A.Pl'L-\R.-\!'<lT

f-·	-
IH'..\N   C: U \ IT	CA!o.E NI \fRF.N.

-
I\Pl- Rl:CORDIXCi OF Pr RSONAL APPFARANCI: IJC:.J\fONG

04 May 20 16	F0-2014--00678
APPLICANT'S lSSUF. ANOTl IF llOARll'S OF.CISIONAI. RATIONALE AJ\E OISCl'SSf.OON THE ATTACHD>AIR FORCI! lllSCHAAGF. UNIEWBOAIU> OEC!SIONAL RATIONIU.E.

Case heard in Washington.D.C.

Advise appl icam of the decision or the Board. t he riglH to a person al appearance witlvwi thout counsel, and the right to submit an applicat ion to the AFBCM R.

*RE Code

I

-(b) (6)

---2--	/"'\	I

----··-	---- . . ·-- - lDORSEM£l'<'I'	DATE: S/5/2016
ltJ•	i f HO\I

Sl\F \!Ril l(

l	..u RF I·\R\ or I Ill -\IH tOK( •.,.M,n, ,.. , ( Ot 'l II	I

I	j

    	so (   rRI l  l wt::; I , !'UI fT .JD	         	
PH Al H.  rx 7 1'll-.J"J

 		A lk H>R(  '. 01>( llA(.I. A•\IE\\  80\kO	 	   	 l J (0\1\14"0 DR. t t• "'- IMO tlOOM
\!'ORF:\\  \(."El , \JO:•rt.:. 901

.....

H.1\'lf)OJ

._--·---- ----••-••	-----------••OO

, 000

......Hoo0 ..00•••-	... ··-oo+o ...	·--·-·-----·-·-----·--

AFHQ FOR:VI 0-2077, JA1'\ 00	(IT-\'  )	Pre\oious

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00678	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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 request to upgrade the discharge characterization.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE :  The applicant received a General discharge for Unsatisfactory Performance

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 Letter of Reprimand for failing to complete the required prerequisite CBT, resulting in the cancellation of the simulator training.

The applicant contends that this discharge was forced on him due to a medical condition that caused him to become nauseous during flight training.  The applicant claims that this medical condition prevented him to complete the required training for the C-17 Loadmaster Initial Qualification (LIQ).  After a thorough review of the applicant's record, the Board found no evidence that would support the applicant's contention of having a medical condition.  The ORB opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior and continue on track with the normal syllabus schedule.
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 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