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
C80ll8ll.	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANll.ATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
>-
x
>-
x
>-
x
-	x
ISSUES	A93.07	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASETO 11iE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

Hf.ARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

20 Apr 2016	FD-2015-00464
l!ISUBAND1111! llOARD'S Dl!OSIONAL JtATJONALB ARBDISCUSSED 0Nnll!A1TAOIEDAm FCllCBDISCJWl.GE IUMliWBOARD DECISJONALJtA'l10NALB.

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.

(b) (6)

	
TO:	SAF/MRBR
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	FROM:	
SECRETARY OF THE AJR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW 80ARD
15 COMMAND DR,EE WlNG, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWSAFB, MD 2076?·7001	

·- 	

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00464	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization 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 characterization.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of 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 processto 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.  His misconduct included failing to report at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty (3x), sleeping on duty, failing to perform a proper tool inventory , failing to document operational checks on aircraft forms, and an off-base DUI.

The applicant contends that his discharge was improper because it was short-notice and he was not provided  a pre discharge medical evaluation and TAPS training.  However, the Board determined that the discharge was not short-notice.  The applicant was notified of the initiation of discharge proceedings over two months after his last incident of misconduct and it took several weeks to process his discharge. Also, contrary to the applicant's contentions, he did receive a separation physical and TAPS counseling.  The applicant also  claims he was told his discharge automatically would be upgraded within six months of discharge.  While a discharge may be upgraded after six months, the upgrade is by no means automatic.  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.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requiremen ts 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