AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b) (6)

GRADE

TYPE GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

X	RECORD REVIEW

;.;_;,;;}		:. ._-:. . , NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING	HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

(b) (6)	x

x x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

x x
A67.10	''\·'» {;\i,t{:.··. .·. . · ,	,	·'t:Q!	l;:.ff :. ' , . :.:rN,01
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

07 May 2015	FD-2015-00072

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.

(b) (6)

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00072	

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 two Article 15s, and one Letter of Reprimand. His misconduct included underage consumption of alcohol, stealing four cans of soda from a vending machine, and stealing food/drink from Buffalo Wild Wings.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. The applicant does submit that he believes the stigma of a General discharge should not be permanent. The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had opportunities to change his behavior. They found the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

The applicant also requests the Board consider his post service conduct and accomplishments in assessing the merits of his application. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was participating in supporting his family and community since his discharge. However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The Board concluded that the applicant's term of service
. was appropriately characterized.

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