AlR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER {LAST, FIRST i\ ll DDLE IN ITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  A PPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	N,\ME or COUNSEi. A'llO OR ORGAl7JITI ON	AOORESSANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEi.
Yt S	No
x
VOTE OF' T11£ llOARO
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTllER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x
x x

I SSUES

A67.00

INDEX Nll\IBER

A94.53

EXlllBITS SUBMlli"IW TO Tll E BOAR D
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICAT ION FOR REV I EW OF DISCHARGE
3 LEli"ER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TH E BOARD
ADD ITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMrnED ATTIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARI NG

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

16 Jun 20 15	FD-20 15-00061
APPLICANTS ISSLIE AND THE DOARD"S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE OISCLJSSCD ON THE ATIACllFD AIR FORCE DIS('flARGE REVIEW BOAR D DECISIONAL RATIO'IAI E

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of 1he Board,the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel,and the right 10 submit an application to the  AFBCMR.

(b)(6)	---

I N DORSEMENT	DATE:  6116/20 I S
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFTllE AIR l"ORCE PERSONNEl COUNCii,

r

AI R FORCE DISCllARGE REVI[\\ BOARD
.5.50 (' STREE WEST, SUI I E 40	1;3; CO.\IMAND DR. EE ll'ING.JRD FLOOR
RJ\NDOLP ll AFB, TX 781504742	ANDRF.\\'S 1\FR . MO 20"762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00061	

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 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.

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 Substance Abuse Treatment Failure - Failure in Alcohol Abuse Treatment

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 two Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included supplying alcohol to an underage airman, and failing to go to his appointed place of duty at the time prescribed (3x).

The applicant contends that his discharge was improper, and he should have never been placed into the ADAPT Program pursuant to Air Force Instruction (AFI) 144-121, Chapter 3. The records indicated the applicant violated Phase II Student's Alcohol Consumption Policy, and as a direct result of the alcohol­ related incident involving an underage airman, he was enrolled into the ADAPT Program pursuant to AFI 141-121, paragraph 3.8.1. The DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he  made in his  Air Force career. 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 inequi ty 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 remai n unchanged.