AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDR£SS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNS£L
YES	No
x

>--

>--

,_

>--

VOTE orTIIEBOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x
x
x

ISSUES	A94.05	I INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO mE BOARD
1	ORDERAPPOINTING THEBOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER  OF NOTIACATION
4 BRIEFOFPERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED ATTIMEOF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

04 May 2016	FD-2014-00225
APPUCAllT'S lS5UBN«> 1111>BO.UJ>'S DllCISIONAL .IA'l'IO(ALI! AIJl DISCIJSSED ON TIE AlTAOlllD Alll FtltCE DISCHUGB 1UMBWBOAIU> DllCISIONAL.IA'l'IJIQLll.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant ofthedecision of the Board, theright to apersonal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submitan application to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)

-	INDORSEMENT	DATE:     S'f/JOI'	I

TO:	FROM'
SAF/MRBR

S£CR£TARY OFTHEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AJR FORCE DISCHARGE R£Vl!W BOARD

SSO C STREET WEST,SUITE 40	l!IJS COMMAND DR, EE WING, >RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB,MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00225	

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 denies the upgrade of the discharge characterization.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of 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 15's and two Letters of Reprimand. His misconduct included charges from a host nation for reckless driving and failing to go to duty on time (3x).

The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He claims that after his reckless driving incident he was singled out and received unwarranted disciplinary actions for his infractions.  After a review of the records, the Board found that the misconduct of the applicant warranted disciplinary actions.  The DRB opined that, through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board found that the negative aspects of the applicant's conduct outweigh the positive aspects of his military record.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct

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 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