AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE	ARD.
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x
x
x
x

·-

ISSUES	A93.01	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITrED TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL' SRELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING

BEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

23Jul 2015	FD-2015-00161
APPUCANT'SJSS!Jt! AND nm BOARD'SDECISIONAL RATIONALE  ARE DISCUSSED  ON nm ATIACHED AIR FORCE DISCliARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE..

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

I
....... '

(b)(6)	-

!-·

;,..	INDORSEMENT	DATE:   81130015·	_ I

TO:

--· ----··--·-- .....·-.. Fiol

-- --·....._..

---....- · ·- ,, ···-·-"·-··	.... t'ii : . . .·-···--   . . ·-'--··

SAF/MRBR	SECRl". fARY OF 11'1EAIR FORCE PERSONNtL COUNCIL

C STREET WEST,SUITE 40

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550	IS» COMMAND DR. EE Wll'IC, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB,MD 207U-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00161	

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 one Sl'.lffiIDary Court Martial, one Article 15, and one Letter of Reprimand. His misconduct included dereliction of duties, sleeping on duty and being absent from his place of duty.

The applicant submitted that he doesn't like the stigma of having a General discharge. He also stated that he would like to be able to tell his children that he served honorably.  After a review of the records, the DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The DRB further 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 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, reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

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.

Inview 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