AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAM E or SERVICE MEMBER (L<\ST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIA.L)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAM£ OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORCANll.A TION	ADDRESSAllD OR ORCAMZATIO/\ Ot'COUSSEL
YfS	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
M EM BER SITilNG	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
I
I	x
x x x
ISSUES	A94.SS	JNDEX   N\,M6t:R	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMrrfEO TO TH£ BOARD
J ORDER APPOINTING 1Ht BOAKD
2	APPLICATION FOR Rf.VIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING Of PlillSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HtARINC DATE	CASE NlM8£R

09 Jul 20 15	FD-2015-00056
Al'l'UCA1•TS ISSvt; A".10THE BOMD-s DECISIONAL RAn°"AU! MilDIKl.>'SSEI> ON THE ATrA01EDAIJt l'OllCI!DISCtlAAOE R.EVIEW BOAllD DECISIO!\AL lATIOSALI!

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 appl ication to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)

TO:

SAF/MRBR

INDORSEMENT

-FRO		
	DATE: 811312015	 	
M:
StCRETARY Of THE AI R  FORCP. PF.RSONt r,N)U:-/Cll.	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE RE''IEW BOARD

SSO C STREET WEST.SUITE 40	ISlS CQ\1MAND DR, F.:F. W1Nt:,JRO F1 OOA
RA  DOLPH AFB.TX 78150742	ASDR£WSAFB,  MD207C-7001

AFHQ FORl'\1 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE N UMBER

FD-2015-00056	

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 -Minor Disciplinary Infractions

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  three  Letters of Reprimand  for operating  a vehicle while intoxicated; failing to notify chain of command of DUI while continuing to drive with a suspended license until being pulled over by security  forces for a traffic violation and arriving at the Honor Guard facility smelling like alcohol.

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He feels that since his charges off base were dismissed and expunged by the civilian court he should no longer be punished for these incidents.  He raised a contention that the administrative discharge violated the principle of double jeopardy  because it referred to LOR's previously received .  The administrative discharge was actually based on the underlying misconduct.  The discharge was under paragraph 5.49, Minor Disciplinary Infractions.  To give the notice required to allow members to respond to discharge action, you must be told about the misconduct.  This is not a violation of the principle of double jeopardy , which is actually not applicable to administrative action in any event but only criminal ones.  In fact, such notice is necessary to fulfill your due process rights.  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