AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARI NG RECORD
NAl\IE OF SEHVI CE i\ 11:1\tOEH (LAST, l'lllST MIOOL E IN ITIAL)	GllAOE	AF'SN/SSAN
(b) (6)
TYl't..   GE	I	PEHSONAL   APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVI EW
CO Jo.SCL	'\\Ir Of C Ol"fl 'DOR ORCA'117.ATl0'1	\DORI'\\ "O OR ORC "l7 \110' OFCOl SSEL HS	'•
x

MEIBER SITTING	.,. 	

YOTE 0F TllE BOARD
llON	Gl :'<l	UOfllC'	OTHER	DEN'r

(b) (6)	x

x x x
x
ISSl ES	A94.SS	l'DE'\   i'l  \IDlR	A67. 10	•:x morrs SUH,11'11't;o TO 'rll E BQ,\RD
I ORIJl·R /\l'PO IN I I NG  1 llE 130ARO

llf \Rl\C 0\11	( \\('l \IBlR
17   lar 2015	F0-2014-00594
2	
M'l'I  l('J\1 10\1 I OR Ri'\'11 \\  OI- IJISCll,\RGE	 	
3	l I  I  II R 01·NO III t('J\l IU/\
4	l3RIH  01 l'IRSO\INLL HI I:.
('Ollt-.SI  I   S RH I·\SI· I U  1111:.130\RD
\0011 10'\I I XlllBll S Sl Bt\111 1 f"D A I llME OI-"
l'I RSON \I  \l'l'I \lt\NCI
I  \Pl  RI C ORJ>J'\Co 01 Pl RSON \I  Al'Pf t\RANC'E HE,\RING

ArPl trA...,'T s ·t;\ f'f /\'0 Tllf OOARD"i OIClIOAI RA'TIO, .\tr ARr 01'-;('l;fSSCDONTHE ATTA('llrD AIR rORrr. 01·11AR,(if Rr:v1rw OOAP.0 Ot( ISIOS.\L. RJ\T10..,A.L£

Case heard in Washing.ion. D.C.

Advise applic;int of th<.: decis ion of lhc Roa rd, 1hc 1 gh1 lo a pcrson;il appcar;incc wi1h wit hout counsel,and the right to submit an application 10 the /\ FHCMR.

(b) (6)	---

l;>;DOR DIE:-.T	l>A I ;: 3/19/20 15
TO	fRO\I

SJ\! 1'1ROR

\ICRrl \R\ m I Ill \IK tOK( l PLKO"fl (Ol f ll
\IM IOR(t Dl(ll\KGt Rt \ IE \\ 80\RO
55')( -, I RI 1 1 \\I -, I.  l ;11 1 40	l<H C O\t\t'l> OR  ... \\l'C lRll U OOR
R·\Nl}OI I'll  \I II. I X -s1'O-H-1	"DRll\\ \t B. \ID l76! i001

---

AFl-I Q FOl i\ I 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V::!)	Prcviou

AIR FORCE DISCHA RGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00594	

GENERAL:  The appl icant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The appl icant 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 b1ief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge

ISSUE: The applicant recei ved 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 regulari ty 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 includ ed four Letters or Reprimand and two Letters of Counseling. Applicant's misconduct included fai lure to use protecti ve eye wear as required, failure to maintain hair within standards, failure to set brakes on light cart and QA documented the safety violation, failure to follow direct orders, conducting unprofessiona l behavior and lack of respect and bragging on Facebook about riding motorcycle at excessi ve speed.

Al though not explicitly stated, applicant feels that his discharge was unwarranted but he does state that he is at fault for the minor disciplinary infractions.  The Board opined that through the administrati ve actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  After a thorough review, it was noticed that the applicant continued the misconduct on n umerous occasions despite the administrative actions. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establ ish that an ineq uity 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 consisten t  with  the procedural and substant ive requi rements of the discharge regulation , was within the discret ion  of  the discharge authority, and that  the applicant was provided  fu l l administrati ve due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no lega l or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discha rge should rema in unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief