AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
OOONlll:l.	NAME OPCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x

>--

>--

>--

>--

VOTE OF 11IE BOARD
MEMBER   SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x
	x
x x

ISSUES	A94.SS	I NDEX NUMllER	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
ADDJTIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT T!ME OF PERSONAL APPEARANC E
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING

KEAR.ING DATE	CASE NUMllER

12 May 2016	FD-2015-00588
Aft'UCMtTS ISSV! Al'll> nil!llO.uD'SDl!OSIQflM. ltATIONALEARE DISCUSSl!D ONlHE ATTACHED AIR PISCilAJWB lUM6W BOAN> Ol!CISIOHAI. M110NAUI.

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:

--	-

FROM:

 	- 	

SAF/MRBR

SECR.ETAJtY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISffiARGE RtVltW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST.SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDRtWS AFB, MD 20762- 7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00588	

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 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 - 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 one Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling.  The reasons for his discharge included being derelict in the performance of his duties, failing to meet minimum fitness standards, failing to lock up weapons inside the armory, involvement in a security breach while performing duties as an entry controller, and wrongfully utilizing the public address system in an unprofessional manner.

The ORB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports and other accomplishments.   They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.   The applicant states that he spent five years honorably serving for the duration of his career and deployed twice.  He further states that considering the actions leading to his discharge were less than severe, he believes that "after two tours of duty" his services are deserving of the GI Bill.  The
ORB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a DD Form 2366, dated 14 September 2007, which included the statement that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements.   Although the applicant's present service characterization  renders
him ineligible for these benefits, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.  A discharge is upgraded or changed only if it can be established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of 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