A1R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD BEARING RECORD
NAMEOFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE JNlTIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)

I

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	RECORD    REVIEW
. :·.. OUEt; ···ft . NAM£ OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORCANIUTION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION op COUNS&L	-	-	-
YES	No
x

O

IEB

V·····TE.OF:'ll ,.. ... O. A-R,.D,•.t"- .-·"-_.....·. .

... ...
... ··''"'1.. - -

MEMBER  SJ'ITING	HON	OEN	uonic	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
'"
x
x
x
x
ISSllES	A94.06	11\DEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS	EDTO J;'HEBQARD .		: ..< 	
1	ORDER APPOINTING  THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASETO 1HEBOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING  OFPERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

R&ARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Oct 2016	FD-2016-00122
, ;l	S 1 \'E;: : f.:	l ON,A:!:}\;\TIO	DISCUSSED   ' ATfAc:rz:o.'IJR.FOR  D	GE	;BO . ECISIQ.NAL, TIQNAI,i;. .:t:f.'.':" ·•;'·i·:.;.:1.; , ·- ':·, :;.'(:1
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.

(bT(6f - -- ----	(b)  (6)
....	• =- .	•'

(b)(6)

··:_: ,:".•--.·::

._:.--;'.:.	.. . .. .

'	INDORSll\CE1''1:	"	·:'Q.  T.E:.:.. .J.131216 :.

' · ·;; :.·

TO:	FROM:

SAFIMRBR

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNOL AIR FORCE DISCHARC& REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535COMMAND DR, &tWlllC, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 10762-7001

AFRQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(BF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00122	

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 wan-anted.  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; five Letters of Reprimand; and three Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included: violating AFl36-2903/Drcss and Appearance standards, by not having length of hair within regulations; failing official fitness assessment; failing to go to unit mandated five days per week physical training; violating a direct order to get a haircut; failing to comply with the order given to fix the outer appearance of his house; violating a direct order to remain on six-ring standby; failing to attend a mandatory flight physical training appointment; failing to go at the time prescribed to appointed place of duty; being incapacitated for the proper performance of duties as a result of wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor; and failing to follow a direct order to report to commander's office in the proper attire of service dress blues, at the prearranged time.

The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to determine ifthe discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions.  The applicant contends the discharge was improper because the commander used a Letter.of Reprimand and a Letter of Counseling as means for his discharge that were over a year old.  He states that these letters were to be pulled from his record due to the length of time since the misconduct action.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity with the discharge action, to include that all documentation were legally used in the applicant's discharge proceedings.

The applicant also cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits asjustification for upgrade.  The DRB noted the applicant had served four years before the discharge was initiated, but concluded that the  applicant's misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his time in the Air Force.  The Board is aware that the applicant's present service characterization renders him ineligible for Department of Veteran Affairs education benefits; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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, c1:il:lilge 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