AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NA ME OF SERVICE MEMBER (L.<\ST, FIRST Mll)DLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORCANl7.ATION	ADDRESS ANO OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No	(b) (6)	(b) (6)
x
VOTEOF THE BOARD
M EM BER SITIING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x
x
ISSUl::S	A93.23	INDEX    NUM8Efl	A67. 10	EXHIBITSSUBMITfED TO THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARG E
3 LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSON NEL FILE 	 COUNSEL'S  RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONA L EXH1BITS SUBMIITED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HtARl!'C DATE	CASE: NUMBER

13 May 2015	FD-20 13-00649
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AN!> nil!BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONl\Lll AM DISCUSS&> ON THE AITACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

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 A FBCMR.

(b) (6)

INDORSEMENT	DATE:  7/10l20JS
TO:	FROM :

SAffMR.8R

SECR!l'TARY OF THE AI R FORCE PERSON'EL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE R.EVIEW BOARD

550 CSTREET W'EST. SUITE 40

ISJS COM.MANI) OR.EE WlNC, JR.I) LOOR

RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS Afll, MO 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00649	
GENERAL : The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge 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.
ISSUE:  The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsi bi l ity 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. In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to 10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board. The applicant's record of service included two Article 15's, six Letters of Reprimand , one Letter  of Admonishment , two Letters of Counseling and two Records of Counseling. The misconduct included failure to go to duty on time (4x's); failure to report to duty with tool box keys (2x's); being arrested and detained for battery domestic violence by civilian law enforcement ; departing duty early and forgetting to set safety mechanisms on vehicle  lift;  using inappropriate and unprofessional language towards medical personnel ; using an unauthorized motorcycle helmet after previously being briefed, receiving multiple discrepancies on a spot QA check and being delinquent on military star card account.

The applicant 's counsel contends that discharge was improper due to applicant having known Traumatic Brain Injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder while in the military. Applicant's  counsel  states that discharge was improper due to these conditions being present and known while applicant served in the military. After a thorough review of the records and advice from the mental health specialist,  the DRB found no documented evidence of Traumatic Brain Injury and no evidence of any mental issues that would directly contribute to the misconduct. Besides documentation that was presented by the applicant from Veteran Affai rs, which is applicant's own statements to thei r office, the DRB found this claim to be without merit. The DRB opined that through the aforementioned administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior and concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. 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