AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE JNlTIAL)	GRADE

(b} (6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COU1'ISEL	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGAl'llZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x

(b) (6)
...
-

MEMBER SITTING

VOTE OF THE BOARD

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
	x•	
	
X*	
	
X*	
	X*	
	x•	

ISSUES	A94.54	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 RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

08 Jul 2016	FD-2015-00470
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RA'JlONALll ,\Q DISCUSSED ON1llE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHAROEREVIEWBOARD 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

(b) (6)

/"'?J"?

C7		INDORSEMENT	DATE: 712812016	 	
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

S£CR&TARY Of THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCRARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40	!SlS COMMAJllD DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX781504742	ANDREWS Al'B, MD 20762-1001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00470	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

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 issues connected 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 (General).  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 three Letters of Reprimand and seven Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included: sleeping at work and losing his line badge; failing to report to an appointment; reporting to work with improper rank on his uniform; endangering six personnel and an aircraft by turning off the power supply unit; failing a fitness test; failing to obey a regulation; failing his career development course (CDC); leaving CDC material unattended for almost 24 hours; failing a dorm inspection; reporting for duty wearing the wrong uniform to a mandatory formation; and improper use of an EZ GO vehicle in the dark without headlights.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the equity or propriety of his discharge.  The applicant claims that he was discharged for the sole reason of failing his end of course and CDC exams twice. He feels that this warrants the change to the narrative reason to reflect "Failure to Adapt" versus "Misconduct - Minor Infractions".  Based on the number of Letters of Reprimand and Letters of Counseling the applicant received throughout his career, the Board  found that the narrative reason was appropriate with the discharge. The Board opined that the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior through the administrative actions taken.  The Board found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  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 it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record and advice from the mental health specialist, the Board found no indication that any mental health issues had an impact on the applicant's misconduct or on his discharge. Additionally, the Board found no evidence to justify  an upgrade of the discharge characterization and change of reason and authority for the discharge.	

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