AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATlON	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF 1BE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC ·	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x•#

x•# x•#
X*#

ISSUES	A94.54	INDEX NUMB£R	A67.10	EXHIBITS  SVBMrrfED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVlEW 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

x•#

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMllER

22 Jun 2016	FD-2015-00377
APPUCAl'Cl"S ISSIJEAND 1llllBOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAU!AIU! DISCUSSED ON 1llllATI'ACHBD AIR FORCE DISOIARGE RIMBW BOARD DECISJONAL RAl10N'AUl.

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)	--	'--
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  711
TO:	FROM:

SAFIMRBR

SECRETARY OFTliEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	ISJSCOMMANDDR,El!WING,J RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD M76J.7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00377	

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.

Pursuant to 10 USC 1553 this board included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with training on mental health issuesconnected with post traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury and/or special training on mental health disorders.

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 was discharged for Misconduct - Minor Infractions with service characterized as Under Honorable Conditions (UHC) (General). The Air Force DRB, 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 Article 15, and three Letters of Reprimand. His misconduct included, sleeping on post, greeting females as "Baby" as they drove onto the base, failing to maintain control of his Common Access Card (CAC), and failing his room inspection.

The applicant cited his desire to receive the GI Bill benefits to continue his education. He claims that having a college education and degree would help better him and his family, help him obtain a "Top Notch" job
and, "perhaps," reenter the military as an officer.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of inequity or impropriety to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  The DRB noted the applicant  had served three years before the discharge was initiated, but concluded the applicant's misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of Air Force service.  The Board is aware that the applicant's present service characterization renders him ineligible for Department of Veteran Affairs education benefits; however, this
is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade. The Board considered whether there were mental health issues that may have caused an inequity or impropriety in the applicant's discharge, but found none based on the available evidence.

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