AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
FOIA  Exception (b) (6)	FOIA EJCCEl)OOn (b) (6)

TYPE GEN	x	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD REVIEW
(:Olll'ISltl;	" NAME OF COUNStL AND OR ORCANI ZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANl7..AT10N Of COUNSEL
V£S	No
x

1

1"' ..;£;	")if ;,•:V<?_t1OF TIIJl	AO_] .>1 "•

l·,;o

MEMBER   SITIING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
FOIA Exception (b) (6)	x
.	x
x x
x
1ssur.s	A94.53	INDEX NUM BER	A67.10	,if	IXJtlBITS UIMITTEDifQ'!"I;,	J)	.it
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARG E
3	LETTER OFNOTIFI CATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILI: COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITJ ONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATt	CASE NUM6R

.

Al'Pl.ICANT'SISSUE 'qEBOARD"SOOC l;µ

ALE l>ISCllSSEDOl:!TllE1TTACHEOAllJ roRCl!DISCRAA.GE BOAllDOOCISIONAl.llATIOHALB.	:..r	, '	:i

18 Nov 2014	FD-201l-00382
'
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.

Names and votes will be made avai lable to the applicant at the applicant's request.

FOIA Exception (b) (6)	FOIA Exception (b) (6)

j..._, .

-  "'   '.:.	!'.l' t!I:'.

'"-

.	"   ·io.  k	.-f!!:l

J\l;.&	iJ!!•litiJflv; :i,.,.	i

1!11..	&
1'0:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY Of THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARCE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	15.15 COMMAND DR. EE WING,JRO n.OOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD lt76l.70f l

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2011-00382	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference between Andrews AFB Maryland, and Randolph AFB Texas, on 18 November 2014.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: Applicant's Contentions
Exhibit 6: Character reference letters

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions

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 and .one Vacation Action. His misconduct included falsely altering a check, stealing from the Unit SJlflCk fund, and unlawfully entering a room with the intent to steal cash.

The applicant cited his desire to receive VA disability benefits asjustification: for upgrade. The applicant did not present any issues of inequity or impropriety in regards to his discharge.·• The Board opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of benefits to the applicant; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the reoord, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, reason for the discharge or 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