AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b) (6)	HEARING DATE
2017-08-03	CASE NUMBER FD-2016- 00309	
TYPE
General	
X	PERSONAL APPEARANCE		NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND/OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND/OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL	
Yes	No			
	
X			

BOARD MEMBERS	VOTE OF THE BOARD	
	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
(b) (6)					X *#	
(b) (6)					X *#	
(b) (6)					X *#	
(b) (6)					X *#	
(b) (6)					X *#	
(b) (6)						
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION 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	
APPLICANT’S ISSUE(S) AND THE BOARD’S DELIBERATIONS ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	
Case heard at JB Andrews, MD.

* - Narrative Reason
# - Reenlistment Eligibility Code

Advise applicant of the decision of the DRB and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.
(b) (6)	

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, AUG 17	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00309	

GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 16 Aug 07 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Serious Offense).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable, a change to the discharge reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Joint Base Andrews, MD, on 3 Aug 17. No witnesses were present and no additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing.

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553, the 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 (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI), and/or training on mental health disorders.

The attached examiner’s brief (provided to applicant only), extracted from available service records, contains pertinent data regarding the circumstances and character of the applicant’s military service.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge reason, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code.

DISCUSSION:  The DRB, 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 changes are warranted.  If applicable, the board can also change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code. 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 determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.

The applicant’s record of service was incomplete and no discharge package or DD Form 214 was available. However, key information regarding his discharge was confirmed by the Air Force Personnel Center.
According to the applicant, he received a General discharge as a result of driving under the influence of alcohol and taking and crashing a stranger’s vehicle without the owner’s permission in May 07.  Applicant also indicated he was convicted of misdemeanor charges in a civilian court and received an Article 15.

The applicant made no contentions that the discharge was improper, but did contend it was inequitable because it was too harsh for his misconduct. He argued he should have been given an opportunity for probation and rehabilitation.  The applicant noted he had completed a bachelors degree, has a lucrative job, and is a model citizen.  However, when questioned, he admitted to another driving under the influence conviction in Jan 16.  His goal is to re-enter military service as an officer or serve the country as a civilian contractor.

The DRB determined the discharge was not overly harsh based on the nature of the misconduct in this case. The applicant’s actions were clearly outside the norm of what is expected from Airmen and reflected very poorly on the Air Force in the local community.  Further, the applicant’s actions put his life and the lives of others at risk.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his very short Air Force career.	

CONCLUSION: The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge. Therefore, the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved.

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 25 Aug 17.  The applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to: SAF/MRBR (CITU), 550-C Street West, Suite 41, Randolph AFB, TX 78150-4743.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief