AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(  b)(6)

I	I

TYPE  GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW
COIJNSEL	NAM£ OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
MEMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(  b)(6)	X+
X+

X+

X+ X+
ISSUES	A94.53	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHJBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OFDISCHARGE
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 OFPERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

11 Aug 2016	FD-2013-00240
APPUC.Qfl'S ISSUl!AND nm BOAJU>'SDllCISIONAJ.&AllONALE ARB DISCIJSSED ON1HE ATTACHED Alll FORCB DJSOIARGE IUMEW BQARD DECISl.ONAL RATlONAl.11.

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.

+ CHANGE REASON AND AUTHORITY  TO SECRETARIAL  AUTHORITY	.,.,..-.--,-	 	
( b)(6)

,_.,. 	

INDORSEMENT	DATE: 8123/2016

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCEPERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535COMMAND DR,EE WING, 3RDFLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 10761-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00240	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

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.

Pursuant to 10 USC 1553 this 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 or traumatic brain injury and/or special training on mental health disorders.

FINDING: After a review of the record, the Board majority voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.

DISCUSSION: 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 four Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling. Her misconduct included: failing to go to duty; failing to go to duty on time; failing to obtain properly documented AF Form 1975; making a false official statement and failing a fitness assessment.

The applicant contends that she was told that she would be discharged for fitness failures, but received a discharge notification for minor disciplinary infractions.  She feels that the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  After a thorough review of the record and the information supplied by the applicant, the DRB determined there is sufficient evidence to support her claim of inequity.  Although the Board does not condone applicant's misconduct, there are significant mitigating factors involving the fairness of the discharge process.  As such, the Board grants the requested relief.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief