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

(b) (6)

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

x	RECORD  REVIEW

NAM!:OFCOUNSEL A/ID OR ORGAl\'12.ATION	ADDRESS M'D ORORGA."<IZATION OFCOUNSEL

(b) (6)

MEMBER SITIING	HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A49.00

INDEX NUMBER

A49.00

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICA T!ON 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  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARJN(l DATE	CASE NUMBER

19 Oct 2016	FD-2016-00076

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/w ithout counsel, and the right to subnlit an application to the AFBCMR.

(b) (6)

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OFTIIE AIR FORCE Pi!RSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISOIARCE REVIEW BOARD
15>5 COMMA.'fD DR, EE WINO,JRD f'LOOR
111'DREWS AFB,MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00076	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals to change the reason for the discharge.

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: two AF IMT 174, Records of Individual Counseling, one for showing very poor performance during water confidence training, and another one for self-initiated elimination from PJ/CRO Indoctrination Course.

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 an Honorable discharge for Unsatisfactory Performance. The applicant contends the discharge narrative and separation code improperly reflect his self-elimination. The applicant claims his discharge narrative and separation code imply underperformance/unsatisfactory performance when, in fact, he self-eliminated. Further, no narrative or separation code exists for self-initiated elimination. 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 change to the narrative' or reason for the discharge.

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