AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FlRST MfDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	x	I	PERSONAL   APPEARAN  CE	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAMlt OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGA. 1.ZA.TION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGAl'il2AT10N OFCOUNSl:L
YES	No	(b) (6)
x
VOTE OF 111E BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	X*+
x•+ x•+ x•+
X*+
ISSUES	A94.05	ll<Dt:X NllMllF.R	A67.10	EXHDITS SUBMJITED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTIN G THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'SRELEASE TO TIIE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDrNG  OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HJWUNGDATE	CASE NUMBER

23 Jun 2016	FD-2015-00568
APPUCANT'S ISSUE A'.«> TRE llOAlD"S DECISIO!(AL MTIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON lllE ATTACHED Alll FOllCE DISCHAIWE REVIEW BOAlD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

Case heard in Washington , D.C.

'

* CHANGE RE CODE TO "3K"

-

-	-

+ CHANGE REASO   AND AUTHOR ITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY
-
(b) (6)

INDORSEMENT	DATE:  7lfn011-.J
TO:	fltOM:

SAF/MRBR

SltCRETARY Of'THEAIRFORO:	LCOl/l'ICIL
Al• FORCE DISCHAJtCE llEVTEW IOAllD
SSO C STREET WEST,SUITE 40	15"COMMM1>DR,  £EWING, JIU> FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	Al'IDUWS  AJ'B,MD  207'2-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00568	

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 appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Joint Dase Andrews, MD, on June 23, 2016.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: Applicant' s additional documents

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING :  After a review of the record and testimony from the applicant, the Board unanimously voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.

DISCUSSION: The applicant was discharged for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions with service characterized as Under Honorable Conditions (UHC) (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 five Letters of Reprimand, and three Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included failing to complete scheduled fitness improvement session, failing to follow protocol, failing to go to appointed place of duty (3x), failing to follow proper protocol following an accident, failing to operate a vehicle in a safe manner, and failing to pass recertification test.

The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. He claims that the four incidents involving missing duty were contributed to by his high frequency hearing loss and his inability to wake up to alarm clocks. He also claims that the other incidents were based more on duty performance and not misconduct. The Board noted the applicant's discharge package was not available, but noted the record contained two performance evaluations, both of which reflect the applicant's overall performance of duty as satisfactory.  The board further noted the applicant was only a few months from completing his expected term of service at the time of his discharge. While a copy of the commander's denial of probation and rehabilitat ion (P&R) was in the file, the absence of the discharge file made it impossible to know the reason for the denial of P&R. Based on the available records and the applicant's testimony, it appears that an impropriety occurred in denying the applicant P&R.  The board was also of the view the applicant's discharge was inequitable.

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 sufficient evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, to change to the reason for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was inconsistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. Therefore, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of the applicant's service is more accurately reflected by	

an Honorable discharge, a change of the reason for the discharge to Secretarial Authority and the reenlistment code changed to 3K under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief