(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00231	

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.

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 applicant’s record of service included: one Article 15; one Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment; three Letters of Reprimand; and three Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included providing false information for enlistment; failing to report the whereabouts of a fellow Airman; late for duty (2x); absent from place of duty; misuse of government travel card; failing fitness assessment; and failing to achieve the minimum passing score on a verbal component of initial duty position.

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 Fraudulent Entry. The applicant contends that the discharge was inequitable due to becoming the subject of an investigation after being unable to provide further statements against a fellow Airman during an interview with the Office of Special Investigation (OSI). The board determined that the information provided by the applicant during the OSI interview was legal, within the scope of their authority and pertinent to the discharge. 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 service 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, 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