AJ R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD IIEAR ING RECORD
NA;\ I E OF SEIWI CE   IEJ\IO ER (L\s·1, FI RS r l\lll)OLE IN ITl/\L)	GR ,\ l>C	A FS'.':/SSAN
(b)(6)	(b)(6)
1 \ 1'1;.. GEN	I	PERSONAL  A PPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   REVIEW
COl·.'oSCL	'\\IE or (04. SEL '- DOR ORG.\\17-\TIO\	IDORrs "DOR ORC:"l7 \Tl0' Ot (Ol,.'>El
HS	'•
x
ron.OF TIIE BOARD
MEi\IBER SITTING	llON	(11.N	uoIll('	Ol llER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x x x
l!>!>I t.	A94.53	l\Ot..  i'l \IK U<	A67.10	::<111811   M1H \11TTt O TO Tll F:80/\RO
I OIU)LR APl'OIN llNG l llE BOARD
2 APPi IC'AllON IOR RI-\ IF\\' OF DISC'llARGE
3  I Hfl R 01·M> l lrlC.\ 1101\	 	
4  ORll r or Pl·RSONNI I  Fii I
\OU ·sn ·s RI 1 1 \SI 10 1111 00.\RD
AODITIO \I I Xl llBll S Sl Bll n ED \f TIME OF l'I RSON .\I  \l'l'I  \It\Nt l
TAPI RI CORDINCi 01 l'I RSOl\ \I ..\PPf-.\R,\\!C'E llE \Rl\!G

lff \IU\G O\TF	( \\I \ \IBH

14 Apr 2015	FD-2015--00031
MPLKA"   L\\I    A'U 1111 l•>,\ltl> ) UI lll(>...'\l ltAllO"All ARf 01\('l'WO\ I HEAlrA( llLU AIR tUIU    Ul'-l ll"Kl1l ,RI \ 11Y. l«MO OI C "''/\I 1\1\110\Al I;.
Case heard i n Washi ngton . O.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/withou t counsel, and the right to submi t nn
appl icntion to the AFBCM R.

(b)(6)

,._

"no.;m: r	DA1E: .t/15/2015
·-

10	FRO\I:
!>.\I \1RBR	St (RI T\M\ ()t Jiii  \Ul IOM.{ l, Plk- 0''£L COl '-< IL

550 (' STRI I  I \\.I S I. M 111 10

\IR tONCt 01'>< 11\R(;t RI \ Ir\\ 80\RO
1 -U (O\l\l\'I) DR.t i  \\I (;. \RO ti C)()R

Ri\NOOl Pll \I B, I >. 7i-.t 0-4.J	\\DRFY.\  \FR. \10 Zt76l·IOOI

.\FH Q FORl\ I 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previou:.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONA L RATlONALE	CASE NU:\18£R

FD-20 15-00031	

GENERAL : The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge 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 ava i lable service record.

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

FIN DING : The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant recei ved a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Discipli nary Infractions

The Air Force Discha rge Review Board, under i ts responsi bi l i ty to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge i f such change is  warranted. I n reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regulari ty in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial cred ible evidence to rebut the presum ption, to include evidence submitted by the applicant. The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and t he discharge process to ensure the discharge met the perti nent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant's record of service included three Article l 5s, one Letter of Rep1imand, and two Letters of Counseli ng. llis misconduct incl uded driving while havi ng suspended driving pri vileges; use of Government Travel Card for unauthorized purchases; maki ng false statements with intent to deceive and found drunk while on duty; failure to go, dereliction of duty and disobeying a direct order; and repo11i ng late to work (3x).

The appl icant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefi ts as justi fication for upgrade.  The ORB noted  that when the applicant applied for these benefi ts, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on October 1 1, 2007) that he u nderstood he must recei ve an Honorable discharge to recei ve future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of these benefi ts to the applicant; however, this is not a matter of ineq u i ty or impropriety which would warrant an u pgrade.

A discharge is upgraded  only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an i neq uity or impropriety took place at the t ime of discharge.  After a thorough review of t he record, the Board found no evidence to justify  an upgrade of the discharge characterization.

CONCLUS ION: The Discharge Review Board concludes t hat the discharge was consistent with  the procedural and substanti ve req ui rements of the discharge regulat ion, was within the discret ion of the discharge authority, and that the applicant was provided  full administrati ve due process.

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

Attach ment: Exami ner's Brief