A IR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD IIEA RING RECORD
NMIE OF   1rnv1n:,\ HJ\ IOEH (Lf\ST. FIR 'IJ\llOOLE INITIAL)	GR/\ OF:
(b) (6)
TYPE GE1	I	l'ER  'ON AL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    RE\'JEW
COl.'\S£L	'\\If or (Ol \ MI  \\0 OR ORG \\IZ,\flO	\OORf SS "OOR ORGA \17 \TIO\ Of COl \SEI.
HS	'•
x	I
\'OTE OF TllE BOARD
\T E\IBER SITTI  'C	HON	Gl't'I	UOl llC'	OTIIER	DlNY
(b) (6)	X*+

X*+ X*+ X*+

ISSl'ES	A94.05	lOE M1)IOER	A67.10	.Xlllllll	Ul\11TTIW rO Tlll!: BO/\RO
I ORDFR APPOINIING 'IllE BOARD
2 Al'Pl.ICAl ION FOR Rl'VIFW OF DISC'llARGE
3  IFI IrR OF NO 111'1('A IION
.t llRll·IOFl'l;RSONNH Fl t
COUNSEi ·s Rl:IEASF 10 mi: BO.\RD
AODll IONAl E>.111131IS SlBf\11llED •\T l IME OF
PLR ONAI \Pl'l.AR \l\Cl

X*+

IWF RI C'ORDll\G OF PERO' \L 1\PPI' ARA'IC'E 11ARING

IU RI'<: 0\ 1•	C \!>l \l 'IBER

13 l\ lay ZO I S	FD-2015-00086
AfPLI( A'l ISSl r \\0 rm.OOARO' 01CL'ilCNAI RATIOSAtr ARF DISCl'SSED 0\ Tiit . TIACllED AIR FORCE Ol'iCllMG!>RtVI!  BOARD Ill( !:>I• •'-;AL RAflO\AlE.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applican t of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel,and the right to submit an applica1ion to the Af-OCMR.

(b) (6)	--

L
- -·	.,.<Rt I\In Ot? Tttt \IR IORC't: PCtbO;'lr.  L COl "Cll.
S \F 1\IRBR	\IR fORC r Dl\('11 \RG t  Rt \I[\\ DO \RO
550 c Sl I{ l l wi:s'·SL 111 40	l .\S (0\1\1 \'0 OK. tt \\ l'V• .)RO ti OOR
R/\NDOI I'll A l B. IX 7!>150-4742	'"DR t \\ S \Fii. ID lt76l-'001

AFl-I Q FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00086	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the reason for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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 perti nent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge and change of reason for discharge, and change of reenlistment code.

ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under i ts responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characte1ization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is  warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmenta l 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. In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to 10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board. The applicant's record of service included three Letters of Reprimands for being apprehended by security forces during an altercation with an NCO/Airman (x2), leaving place of duty without proper authori ty and then refused to obey a lawful order given to return to training; one Record of Ind ividual Counseli ng for refusing to comply with an order and became argumentati ve.

The applicant contends that his discharge was not proper. The member bel ieves that his discharge was based on lies and ha lf true stories. After a thorough review of the records, the Board opined that the applicant's overall misconduct during his term of enlistment was the reason for his discharge and found no evidence to warrant an upgrade of the discharge characterization. A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an ineq uity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.

CONCLUSION : The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedura l and substant ive requirements of the discharge regulation, was withi n the discretion of the discharge authori ty, and that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board fu1iher concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remai n unchanged.

Attachment: Exami ner's Brief