AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVlEW BOARD H EARI NG RECORD
NAM E OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE IN ITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE   GE	I	PERSONAL   A PPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   REVIEW
COUNSEL	NA\IE Of' COU.,SEL ANO OR ORCANllA1101'1	AODR£SSA:>O OR ORCA:\IZATIO:\ OFCOU'iSEL
YES	So
x
VOTE Of THE BOARD
M EMBER SITTING	!ION	GE	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	I	x
x x x
x
rssvi::s	A94.53	INOGX NVM0£1t	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO TICE BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTtR 01' NOTIFICATION
4   BRltf Of PERSONNtL FILE
COUNSEL S Rl::LtASE TO HIE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS  UBMITIED Ar TIME Of PERS01'ALAPPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE llEARING

HEARL'iG DATE	CASE M \IBCR

09 Ju l 2015	F0-2015-00095
AJ'PLJCA,'T"S ISSUE AND 11Itl)()AJU)'S OtCISIOSAL RATIOSALEARI: OISCVS<.. 60 ON nm ATTACHED AIR !O' RCE OISCHAll<lE R£\llEW 90\JU) 0£C1SIONAL RAT10SAI.£

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCM R.

(b)(6)

-

L l>ORSEMENT	DATI::   7115/2015
TO:	FROI:

St\F/MRBR

SCCRCTARY Of TllE AJR FORCE PERSO:\ 'IEL COt.".'iCIL AIR fORCt OISCllARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST.SUITE 40	ls.IS CQ\1\IA.\D OR. EE \\l:\ C. JRD YLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB.TX 78150-4742	A\DR£\\   AF11. MOZ076l-7otl

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

chic
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00095	

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 four Letters of Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling. The misconduct included failing to pay mili tary star card on time (2x's); failing to report at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty (2x's); failing to shave prior to reporting for duty and failing to follow technical orders after being previously told.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge.  The applicant does state that he takes full responsibility for his misconduct and he now understands how a General discharge affects you after separation.  The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no  evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  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.

Applicant also cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on February 20, 2009) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of these benefits to the applicant; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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