AlR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME 01' SERVICE l\IEMl3ER (LAST, FI RST 1'JIOOLE 11\ITIA L)

GKA OE	J\FS.'lfSSAN

PERSONAL APPEARAN CE
f -coU_NS_E_L_--1 1\AIE OF COUNSf LANO OHOHCANIZATIO'.'/
YES	NfJ
x

RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZAT ION OF COUNSEi.

VOTE: OF THE BOARD

M EMBER SITTING

JJON

GEN

OTl lER	l)l NY
x
x

A67.90

x
x
x
EX I II IiITS SUB. 11TTf;I)·ro Tll£ 801\RO
ORDER APPO INTING TlIE B01\RD
2  l\PPLICAT ION FOR REVIEW OF DISCl IARGE
3  LETrER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEFOF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOt'\IW
Al)l)ITIONAL  l.:XI11131TS SUBMrrrED  AT TIME OF
PERSONAL Al'PEAR!\NCI:

TAPE RECORDING OF Pl RSONJ\L 1\f>PEAR:\NCE  IIEARING

                                  C \Sf:M MllE R

22 Sep 2014	FD-20 14-00391
APPi ICAl'ff ;ll'E A!\l:> rm:OOARo·s l)f('JSIONAL RAJ IONAJ.E ARE Dl5Ct1S;1,1> ON I llE Ar I ACI 11·0AIR fORCL, DISf l lt\l\GE l{EVIEW IJOARI) l)ECJSION,\L RATIONALE.

Case  heard   in  Wash i ngton, D.C.

J\dvise applican l  of the decision of the Board, the right  to a pcrsontil  appearance with/withou t  counsel, a nd  the right to subm it  an application  to  the A FBCM R.

Names and voles wi l l be made ava i lable to the appl icant at the applicant 's request.

TD:

SAF/MRBR
550 c s·1RFTI WES r. sun E -10
Rt\NDOLPllAf'B. TX 781 50--li-12

t'ROI:

SECIU.:T.\-HY OF Ttn: t\IH FORCE pf;nSONNl:L ('OUNCIL
AIR FORCE OJSClll\RGE Rr.1·1r.W BOARO I ('OMMANO DR.t t:\\'INC•.lRf> f'l.OOR ANORE\\S IFll. 10 20761-7001

A FHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATJONALE	CASE NUi\IBER

FD-2014-00391	

GEN ERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (ORB), without counsel, via video teleconference between A ndrews A FB Maryland and Travis A FB, CA on September 22. 2014.

The attached brief contai ns avai lable perti nent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FIN DING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge

ISSUE: A ppl icant recei ved a General discharge for pattern of misconduct - cond uct prejud icia l to good order and discipl ine.

The Air Force Discharge Review Board , under its responsibility  to examine the propriety  and  equ ity of an Appl ica nt's discharge, is authorized to change the cha racter of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. I n reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity i n the conduct of governmental affairs unless  there  is substantial  credible evidence to  rebut  t he presumpt ion, to  include evidence submitted by the appl icant. The Board did complete a thorough review of the circu mstances that Jed  to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the pert inent standards of equ ity and propriety. The records indicated the appl icant recei ved two Article l 5s, seven Letters of Reprimand,  and  one  Letter  of Counsel. His misconduct incl uded  failure to obey an order from an NCO, sleeping on post. failure to go on time, sp"eedi ng and underage consumption of alcohol whi le operat ing a motor vehicle.

The appl icant presented  no issues regardi ng the ineq u i ty or impropriety of his discharge.  The Board opined that t hrough admi nistrati ve actions, the applicant had ample opportuni t ies to change his behavior.  They found the seriousness of the willful  misconduct  offset any positi ve aspects of the applicant's duty performance.   The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of improp1iety or ineq u i ty to warra nt an u pgrade of the discharge.

A discharge is upgraded on ly if the appl icant and the Boa rd can establ ish that an ineq uity or i mpropriet y took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough  review or t he record. the Board  found  no evidence to justi fy an upgrade of the discharge.

CONC LUS ION : The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedu ra l  and substant ive requirements of the discha rge regulat ion and was within the discretion of the discharge authori ty and the applicant was provided full administ rat ive due process.

In view or the foregoing findi ngs, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of d ischarge and dete1mines the discharge should remai n unchanged.

A ttachment: Exami ner's Brief