AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
coucm.	NAME Of' COllNSl.L AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION Of' COUNSEL YES	Nt
x
VOTE OF THI: BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
•	x
x x
•	x
ISSUES	A93.0l	INDEX NUMBER	A84.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTJNG THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHffilTS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING OAT£	CASE SUMJl&R

09 Jun 2016	FD-2015-00062
M!UCANT'SISSOl!Alll>nEIOA&D'SDllClllONAL 11.ADl!ICIJSSS>ONnEArtAOllDAaflQaCll l!JMl!W llOUI>	M'JIOtWJ!l

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 rit to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

•	Signal

i
(b)(6)

lNDORSDIENT	DATE:    '711tl81'   	

TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

S&CRETARY OFTllE AIR FORCE l'ERSOM•'EL COL'NCIL
AJR fORCZ DIS<:mRGt R£\ITEW llOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	15.l!COMMAND DR,EEWlliG. 3RD FLOOR
RANOOLPH AFB, TX 781504742	ANDREWS AFll, MD llmJ.7'01

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00062	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization 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.

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.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING: The Board finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Unsatisfactory Participation. 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 contends the discharge is no longer warranted due to the positive changes he has made in his personal life and career. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant is doing well and has a good job; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade. The Board opined that the applicant had ample opportunities to inform his command of his personal problems with the possibility of being placed on Inactive Ready Reserve status prior to discharge actions.  The DRB found that the characterization of the discharge was appropriate.

A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record and advice from the mental health spec ialist, the Board found no indication that any mental health issues had an impact on the applicant's misconduct or on his discharge. Additionally, 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 the discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief