AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEt\IBER (LAST,FIRST t\UDDLE IN ITlAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL A PPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSU.	NAME OF COUNSELA.'ID OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZAT101'1 or COONStL
VES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	l lON	GEN	UOTHC   I	OTllER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x

x x x
ISSUES	A95.00	INIJ&X NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBl\DlTE D TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICA TJON
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TCME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APl EARANCE HEARING

HEARING DA 1E	CASE NUMOER

28 Sep 2016	FD-2016-00074
APPLICANr·s ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED A.IP. FORCE DISCHARG6	BOARD  DEOSJONAJ.. llATIONALE

Case heard in Washington , D.C.

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

I

(b)(6)

/"	/ ·

 	- 	

SAF/MRBR

1(./	'tNDORSEMENT

J"ROM:

DATE: 9129/lOt:-	J	 	

SECRETARV OP lllEAIR FORCE PRRSONh'EL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCllARGE REVll".W BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COM.\IAND  DR,£[ WING, JRD Fl.OOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	-""DREWS At"B, MD 10762-'/00I

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00074	
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

Pursuant to 10 USC 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 injur y and/or special training on mental health disorders.

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 a General 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 i f 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: three Letters of Counseling and four Letters of Reprimand. His misconduct included: dereliction of duty x3 (technical data violation, using cell phone during mandatory study hours, and fail to secure work environment) , failure to go, fitness assessment failure, and Operation Risk Management violations x2 (walked underneath the tines of a forklift lowering a 7,000 lb load and stepped between a moving vehicle and the equipment it was towing).

The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable beca use he thinks his response to the discharge notification was not considered by his commander.  Evidence in the record indicate that the applicant's commander did consider the response to the discharge; however, the commander determined retention was not appropriate.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  The Board concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate based on the misconduct.

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 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 just ify 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 discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachrnent : Examiner's Brief