AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVJEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM£ OF SERVIC£ MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE   HON	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
CQUNSt:L	NA)1E OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCA1'1ZATION OFCOU 'SEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER SITTI NG	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x *#
x *# x *# x *#
x *#
ISSU£S	A93.23	INDE.X.  NUM 0£R	A42.00	EXHIBITS  SUBMITTEDTOTHE   BOARD
1  ORDER APPOINTING Tl-IE BOARD
2   APPL!CATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER Of NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL"S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONA L EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARISC DATE	CASE NUMBER

09 Jun 2015	FD-2014-00623
APPUCM'T'S ISSIJ1' AN1> Tl-Iii BOARD'S DECISIONAL R.ATIONALE >.R£ DlSCUSSEX> ONno; ATTAOl£D AlR FORCE OJSOIAA.GE R.IM!l'>' BOARDOECISIOAl. AATIONALE

Case heard in Washington , D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR.

* RE code
# Narrative

.(b) (6)	-

INDORSEMENT	DATE:  7/8JZOIS
TO:	"fR'OM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF TH£ AU! FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE OISCHARCE R£\1EW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COL\IANO OR.EE WING. JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANOR£WS AFB.MD 20761 7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00623	

GENERAL:   The applicant appeals for change to the reason and authority for the discharge and to change the reenlistment code.

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 change of reason and authority for discharge and change of reenlistment code.

ISSUE: The applicant received an Honorable discharge for - Adjustment Disorder

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 preswnption, 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 submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge.  The applicant does submit that he believes his discharge was rushed and deserves a second chance to re-enlist.  The applicant was diagnosed with a severe adjustment disorder, a condition that would interfere with military service.
With advice from the Mental Health Specialist, the Board found that the discharge was appropriate.  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 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 a change to the reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

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