AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDOLE INITIAL)

(b)(6)

GRADE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NA.MEor COUNSEL ANDOR ORCA.NIZATION

x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOll'NSEL

(b)(6)

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x x

ISSUl:S

A93.19

INDEX NUM 8ER

A67.10

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPUCATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTlFICATION
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

HEARING DATE	CASENIJM8ER

19 Oct 2016	FD-2016-00092

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.

I
\
(b) (6)

TO:

SAF/MRBR
5.50 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781S0-4742

FltOM:

SECJU:TA.RY or THE A.IR f'ORC£ PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORC't: DLSOIARC£ RllVl£W BOA.RD
15.15 t'OMMAND DR, EEWING, JRD fll..OOR A.NDREWS A.f8,MD 2016Z..7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JAN 00

(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00092	

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 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 injury 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 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 (failed to refrain from drinking or possessing alcohol while under the age of 21 in 2006 and in 2009 drove under the influence of alcohol while driving off base and involved in an accident and left the scene without making identity known) and one letter of reprimand (LOR) for driving under the influence of alcohol while driving off base.

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 does not contend of an inequity or impropriety during the time of discharge.

The applicant does contend he served his country honorably despite the alcohol related incidents, which all occurred off-duty and off-base.  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 Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

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 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 discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief