AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW 	
COWlllL	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORCA,.,'IZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x
x
ISSUES	A92.19	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITl'ED 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 TIM:E OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEAAJNG DATI!	CASE NVMBER

19 May 2016	FD-2016-00043
A1PUCANT'S 1SSUiAND nm llOARD'SDECISIONA.L llATIONALB ARJI DlSCUS$l!D ON1111!A'ITAOlllD Alli. lllSCH.u.Cll! RIMliW llOAl1D Dl!CISIONAL li110NALI!.

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)	-	-

INOORSEMENT	DATE:  f/1
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRCTA11Y OFTIIE AIR t'ORC& PE.tlSOM•(EL COVNCIL
AIR FORCE DlsatARGE REVIEW tioARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	ICOMMAND DR, EE WING,3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX78150-4742	ANDREWS Al'B. MD 20762-1001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00043	

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 an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) 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, one Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment, and two Letters of  Reprimand. His misconduct included  absenting himself from his place of duty without authority, failing to refrain from using his Government Travel Card (GTC) when not permitted, being arrested for driving under the influence, and failing to obey a lawful order.

The applicant requests consideration for the upgrade of his discharge based on his having served with distinction and building an exemplary service record prior to the events that led to his discharge.  In support of his request he submits character reference letters and extracts from his military personnel record.

The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.   The Board found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  A discharge is upgraded only if it can be 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.

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 the discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief