AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NA ME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

.

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
CQUNSEI..	NAM£ OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESSANO OR ORCANl2.ATION OP COUNSEL.
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

-

-(b) (6)	X #
X #

X #
....

-

X #

X #
ISSUES	A94.S3	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LElTER 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

14 Apr 2016	FD-2015-00534

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

"(b) (6)

.

-

INDORSEMENT	DATE:   

TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR f'ORC£ DISCHARGE REVI EW BOARD
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	153SCOMMAND DR.££ WINC, lRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS ArB,MO 20762·7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00534	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for an 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.

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 and change of reason and authority for 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 two Article 15s. One Article 15 was received for failing to refrain from consuming alcohol while underage, assaulting a fellow airman and being drunk and disorderly. The applicant received a second Article 15 for being derelict in his duties and underage drinking.

The applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claim. The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had opportunities to change his behavior. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any 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 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 or reason 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