AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
coUNSF.L ·-	NAME OFCOUNSltL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

l
YES	No
x

'

-·	VOTE OFTJIE BOARD
'

MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
,_
x
,_
x
...
x
,_
x
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67.30	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BO
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 	
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITIED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARlNG

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Apr 2015	FD 2014-00737
AJ>PUCANT'S ISSUE AND 1llEBOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE AllB DISCUSSED ON TIIB ATTACHED AIR FO!lCE DISCHARGE RJ!VIl!W BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONAU:.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

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

(fif(6T------------	of'.,....,._ ,ft",.."'"'""*"........r.-11...... . ,,..

;	INOORSEMENT		DATE:  614/2015	I

.--·-- .....------  --- -   · ---- -- - ·   - ·.__ _,

:1:    .	... . ··- -·--· ···-- --------·	. ----·-·--··-· -- .....·-·· ·- ·---·-- -------

TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFTIIE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE: DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING,3RD FLOOR

RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 207611001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00737	

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 contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense

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 for stealing a backpack and three pairs of sunglasses from AAFES.

The applicant contends that the discharge was unwarranted because it was too harsh. The applicant claims that he did not steal the items in question in regards to the Article 15. After review of the records, the Board found that the applicant was given an opportunity to prove his innocence in court, by declining the Article 15 and choosing to go to trial, however he chose to decline a trial by accepting the Article 15.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. 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