AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVlEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME or SERVICE MEMBER (L"\ST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE  GE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AXO OR ORCANLZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTIN G	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x x
x
ISSUES	A94.SS	IND£',\'.     NU1BCR	SA	EXHIBITS SUBMITl'ED TO TU_E BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRfEF OF PERSONN EL FrLE . COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHlBlTS SVBMlTTED ATTIMEOF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDfNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING

HEARIXC DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Jun 2015	FD-20 14-00587
llrLICANr'S ISSUE ANO 11fEBOARD'S DECISIONAL RAnONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AlTAOiEDAlll FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAIU> 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 AFBCMR.

(b)(6)	--

r		lNOOllSEMEN'r		DATE:  779/2015	I  TO:		FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY or THtAJR FORCE PERSONi\'EL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE R£\1£W BOARD
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40	IS!$ COMMAND  OR,££ W!NC, 3RI) 1'1-00R
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	Ai'IDRIWS AFB.  MO 2076!-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00587	
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 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. 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 one Article 15, one Vacation of Non-Judicial Punishment, three Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling. The misconduct included failing to go to duty on time (4x's); failing to  follow direct order; drunk and disorderly; underage consumption; smoking in unauthorized smoking area; failing to comply with dining facility policy letter by departing assigned area numerous time, eating food on serving line, failure to remain at work and failure to return to work.

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable due to problems she believes was related to her insomnia diagnosis and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder resulting from a sexual trauma. Applicant also mentions that she believes her administrative discharge was the result of a SARC report that she reported April 5, 2013.
At the time of notification of discharge, para. five of the memorandum  mentions the unrestricted report of sexual assault within the last twelve months and if applicant believed that this recommendation for discharge was in retaliation for making the report, the response was "No".  After a review of the records and advice from the mental health specialist, the DRB was unable to find evidence relating the result of sexual trauma to the misconduct.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  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 find ings, 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