AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (lAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b)(6)	GRADE	
TYPE GEN 	
QOllNSa,		I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW	
	NAME or COli'NSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANl7.ATJON OFCOUNSEL
	
YES	No			
	x			

MEMBER SITTING	VOTE OF THE BOARD	
	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
(b)(6)						X#*	
						X#*	
						X#*	
						X#*	
						X#*	
ISSUES	A94.55	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMIITED 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

12 May 2016	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00603			
ISSl1I!ANDU1B BOARD'S Dl!CISIONAL ltATIONALE AAS DISCUSSED ON 11!EATTACHED AIR l'OllCl!DISCHAMll!1llMl!WBOAID DICISIOMAL JtAl10NALB.	
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 AFBC.MR.

#Narrative Reason	
*RE Code	

 	

(b)(6)

INDORSEMENT

DATE:

6

TO:

FROM:

SAFIMRBR
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
IS35 COMMAND DR. U WING, lRDn<>OR ANDREWSAFll, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00603	

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 was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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, two Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, and one Record of Individual Counseling. His misconduct included failing to bring required items to training, violating policy by having a cell phone while on duty, eating during front desk duty, failing to conduct and annotate hour security checks, failing to meet Block IV, Unit IO minimum requirements, failing to have the required license plates displayed on his vehicle, and failing to obey a lawful order by wrongfully being off­ base.

The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident. The Board opined that, through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior. The DRB recognized that the applicant had served 10 months before the discharge was initiated, but concluded that the applicant's misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his time in the Air Force. 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 ju stify an upgrade of the discharge characterization or change to the reason for the discharge and the reenlistment code.

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 found no evidence to justify characterizing the applicant 's service or to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief