IJllOORSEM&Vf

TO:

FROM:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78IS0-4742

AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b) (6)	GRADE	
TYPE GEN	x	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD   REVIEW	
C'O(JNSl.L	NAME OF COUNSEL ANDOR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESSAND OR ORC-""J.Z.ATIOll Of COllEL	
YES	No			
	x			

-(b) (6)
-
-
...
-	
MEMBER SITTING	VOTE OF mE BOARD	
		HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
							
X #*	
							
X #*	
							
X #*	
							
X #*	
							
X #*	
ISSU£S	A93.00	IND EX NUMBER	A67.10	EXDIBITS SUB\.fITTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL Fll.E	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TOTHE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
HE.ARING DAU

24 Aug 2016	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00343			
APPUCANrS ISSllEAND1llEBOARD'SDEC RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON lllEATfACBED AJJt FOP.Cl! DISC'HAROE RIMEW 80ARD 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.

# Narrative Reason
* RE Code

- .-	/	
(b) (6)	

DATE :"ifi5lio1

SEC1tt'TARV OF nl!AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNOL ArR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
IS>5 COMMAND OR,U WINC, 3Rll FLOOR
ANDREWS AR,MD 207'1-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00343	

GENERAL:   The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the reason and authority 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 pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION: 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 for underage drinking.

The applicant contends that he was told prior to discharge, that he would be able to enlist with the Army once separated from the Air Force.  He also stated that he was young and immature at the time of the discharge and has since matured.  The DRB recognized that the applicant was 20 years of age when the discharge took place.  The Board opined that the applicant was no younger than the vast majority of first­ term members who properly adhere to Air Force standards of conduct.  Additionally , the Board determined that the applicant may have been told that he would be able to enlist with the Army, however this requires a favorable re-enlistm ent code at the time of discharge.  The DRB 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 applicant's service was appropriate due to the misconduct.

A discharge is upgraded only if it is established 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, a change to the 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.

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