--  --- ------ - -----

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVJEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OFSERVJCE MEMBER (LAST,FJltST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GE'.\!	x	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	I	RECORD  REVIEW
.:.. ·cos Jk: NAMB Of COUNSELAND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No	(b)(6)	(b)(6)

..

x

-·- ..

VJ. Q,	lJ9..·:.· ,-··.:::· ,, ·:::::·;11.p

,..

MEMBER  SITTING	I!ON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	X*#
X*# X*#

X*# X*#
ISSUES	A94.05	11'\DEXNUl\UIER	A67.10	·.EXB.IBITS.stm	D:J"OTHE;ll_C_f A:Rp .'· ... ··._!- {5
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OFNOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO IBE BOARD
ADDmONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

H&\RINC DATE	CllSltNUMBER
13 Oct 2016	FD-2015-00637	.

ANDTH

OAR

S.llEO

..-;..·,::""''.'?ft.1

·::/\1PUCAN'I'S.ISS!re	EB	D.	SIONAI: RATIONALE'"ARSDISCUSSED ON THEil•ITACHED'A!R FORCEDISCHAROE REVIEW BOARD DECIS!ONAL-RA1JONALE. •  \->  .
i.

. ..

.......5:.·.1·:;° "• .... .'li,<'n,i"·- r.:::': ,;:,'"I',.··:; .J. ,.:, ..;··?·: : • . ..

..•";,!:.

· ..	. :.	.· ,;·	•	-"--	r.-_ . :·

._ ?     . :·:-::	. .J:·.

Case heard in Washington,D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBC.MR.

*Narrative Reason
#RE Code

-	.

.'•	'

(b)(6)	(b)(6)

-.:._

. ·<.- ·:;:r. ·:1:·> ::. .·;· ·.i. ·= :r ,··-·-. .•.	'  .IN. ).)ORS.ENT

-	. . . ..	.,. DA, }::;·0(311' 20fc>·:;.;:.,.,-;.: . ... .·..:· .,::. ::r:j

TO:	FROM:
SAFIMRBR	SECRETARY OF lll&AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNOL
AIR FORCE DISCHARCB R£VIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST.SUITE 40	ISlSCOllfMAND DR, EE WINC, 3RD n.OOR
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742	ANDRBWS AFB,  m20!'2-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00637	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorabie, 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 Base Andrews, MD, on October 13, 2016. A witness was present and testified on the applicant's behalf.

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: The Board finds insufficient evidence of an mequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION: 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 ifsuch change is warranted.  Inreviewing 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 bf 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: three Letters of Reprimand; one Letter of Couriseling; and one Letter of Admonishment. His misconduct included: failing a dorm room inspection; driving a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol; failing to arrive on time for duty (2x); and assaulting a local police officer and willfully discharging a firearm in a public place.

The Board completed a thorough rview of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to determine· if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions arid Commission of Serious Offense. The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on minor infractions
within 35 months bf exemplary service in the United States Air Force.  The DRB took note of the applicant's
duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

A discharge is upgraded  only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of c;iischarge. After a thorough review·of the record, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, change of reason and authority for the discharge, or change to 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.

Inview 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