AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRSTMIDDLEINITIAL)	GRADE

i'f;.:.  tJ!' ';; NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORCANIUTION
YES	No
x

X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESSAND OR ORCANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

ISSUES

A94.05

MEMBER SITTING

L"DEXNllMBER	A67.10

HON	GEN	UOTHC

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

01HER

DENY
x x x
x x

2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FCLE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO rnE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

lltARINC DAT.Ii:	CA.S£ NUM'BER

27 Sep 2016

FD-2016-00018

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the rigbt to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MRBR
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF 1ll&AIR FORCE P£RSO'IN'EL COUNOL
AIRFORC& DISCllARO&R&VIEW DOARI> ISJSCOMMAND DR, EE WlllC, 3RD FLOOR ANDIU!.WS AFB, MD 10762-1Q01

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

-·  --------·- . .

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00018	

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.
Pursuant to 10 use §1553 this board included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with training on mental health issues connected with post traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury and/or special training on mental heth disorders.

The attached btief 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 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 two Article 15s, t\.vo Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Admonishment, and one Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included: failing to obey a lawful order (3x); failing to adhere to established curfew hours; being derelict in performance of duties; and failing to refrain from using a cell phone while on duty.

The Board completed a thorough review 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.  The applicant contends that his discharge was unjust because it was based off of questionable paperwork in his file that he did not deserve. He stated that the Article 15 he received was for doing homework on his cell phone while on break. After a review of the records, the Board found that the applicant engaged in various types of misconduct which tended to degrade and disrupt good order and discipline. The Board surmised that the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The DRB concluded that the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his claims of his discharge being unjust. The negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After athorough review of the record and advice from the mental health specialist, the Board found no indication that any mental health issues had an impact on the applicant's misconduct or on his discharge. Additionally, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization.
-
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

1 .
i