AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAMB OF SERVICB MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INl'I'IAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
•·:;• C?LJNS. \'"i NAM!: OFCOUNSEL ANO OR ORC/\NIUTIOll	.	AJ>ORESSAND'ORORCANIUTION OFCOUNSE L	-
Y£S	No
x
VQTE OF' TIIE13.C'.?A!W '.: .;<..·1... -- ;('··· ... ,. 3
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	X#*

X#* X#* X#*
X#*
ISSUES	INDEX NU•tBER	ITS  SMITID, TO,THE-,BQ	·::  ·•.	I
A93.07	A67.10
A93.Z2	1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEFOFPERSONNEL FD..E COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHillITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONALAPPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

lflll\R.INGl>...T&	CASENUMOER

26 Oct 2016	FD-2016-00048

Ollit

BO

ALS:

.:•·

•,

APPLICAJtT'S  ISSUEAN	AA!> 'SDECISIONAL RA'110NALE ARE DISCUSSED ON TI!E'ATTACH£0 AIR FORCE OlSCHAlOE liYIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATION	••   ••      ·...:..    r•4 r •      '(',	- .;'ii ·1
·	·' · ·':.  . .. .1,...Xf.·..f  · ........     · \'	·: i; ··	··· .	.. ···· . ··.. ..·rs :: :: ·.;:,:· ;il- ..:....
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)	5

(b)(6)

'	{b)
y::·t·'.•. /:·: ·: ·::,'r' .... •.. · .j.ff-::::2/?·;;::. ..'	ORSEJ\l)i:NT	.,	·' r •  •

.··

... ...
'

:..P.1'TE,;1;J	!. :· ;:.':::_-;·'i.?-::·:.·: {t'·} ?'··f] ,

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNE COUNO L
AIRFORC£1>1SCKARGE R£VIE\V 80ARI>
SSO CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 781504742	ANDRB AFB,MO 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00048	

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 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 Vacations of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment; three Letters of Reprimand; and one Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included: failing duties as outlined in AFI36-2618, Paragraph 3.1.6., know and understand the wingman concept;reporting late for duty; failing to arrive for duty at the prescribed time (3x); failing to report for duty on two consecutive days; failing to arrive for duty at the prescribed time on several occasios; with intent to deceive, making a false official statement to a senior non-commissioned officer.

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 submitted no issues regarding the equity or propriety of his discharge.  The applicant states that he would like a second chance despite his misconduct so that he may serve his country in the Air National Guard.  The Board opined that, through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The characterization of the.cµ.scharge 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 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.

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	

i

I	-

: