AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	l	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUMSEL	NAME 01'COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIU'rlON OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF TIIE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	X*#
X*# X*# X*#

ISSUES	A93.19	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITSSUBMITTED 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 APPEARAN CE

X*#

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Aug 2016	FD-2016-00003
APPUCAN'MJSSVE AND nmBOARD'S Dl!CISIONAL RA'IIONALBAR&DlSCUSSEO ONTHE AT!'ACHED AIJl. FORCEDISCHAltG£ R1MEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

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
#RE Code

(b)(6)	-·

c::;::>	INDORSEMENT
TO:	FROM:

c:>

DATE:   8/26/2016

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF TIIE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE Rl1.VJEW BOA.RD
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	IS.IS COMMAND DR, EE WING, )RD rLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS Al.'B, MO 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00003	

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 (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 was discharged for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions with service characterized as Under Honorable Conditions (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 one Article 15 for failing to refrain from providing alcohol to persons under the legal drinking age of 21 and failing to complete AETC Form before visiting off base lodging.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the equity or propriety of his discharge.  The applicant stated that be accepts the consequences for his actions and believes he deserves a second chance so that he may reenlist and serve his country in the military.  The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, they found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  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 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, change to the reason for the discharge, or 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 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