AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARIN G RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COl!NS£L	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No	(b) (6)
x
VOTE OF mE BOARD
MEMBER   SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x*
X* x*
X* x*
ISSUES	A94.53	IND£XNUMBER	A67.30	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

09 Jun 2016	FD-2015-00571
Al'PLICANT' S ISSUE AND 1llEBOARD'SDECISIONAL RATIONALE A1t.E DISCUSSED ONTIIE ATTAOIED AIR FORCB DISCHARGE R£VIEW BOARD DliCISIONAL RATIONALE.
I

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)

-	INDORSEMENT	DATE:     6121/2016
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1S35 COMMAND DR,EE WING,JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00571	

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.

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 received a General discharge for Misconduct - Pattern of Misconduct.  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 a Civilian Conviction, two Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling. The reasons for his discharge included operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol off base and negligently driving a vehicle causing injury.

The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because the Japanese Law is unfair and unjust in cases which involve driving with any alcohol in the driver's system.  He also stated that if the incident would have taken place in the United States, he would not be in violation of a crime.  When stationed outside the United States, Airmen are required to follow the laws of that jurisdiction.  The DRB opined that the service characterization of the discharge was appropriate.

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 no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization or change to the 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 the discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief