AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD  H EARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER {LAST, FIRST MIDDLE lN ITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARA NCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME 01'COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No	(b) (6)	(b) (6)
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEM BER  SITIING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x•
x•

ISSUES

A94.SS

INDEX NUMBE R

A67.10

x•
x•
x•
EXRlBITSSUBMITI.ED TO nm BOARD

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVlEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATlON
4	BRlEF OF PERSONN EL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIB ITS SUBMITTED AT TIMEOF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARJ, C DATE	CASE NliMBER

02 Jul 2015	FD-2015-00116
APPLICANTS ISSUE AND ntE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIOl"ALEARE DISCUSSl!D ON 1liEA1TACHED AIR FORCE DJSCHA.RGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

Case heard in Wash ington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an application to the AFBCMR.

* CHA  'GE REASON AND AUTHORITY  TO SECRETARIA L AUTHOR ITY
(b) (6)

INDORSEMENT	-

DATE: 8/5/l015	 	

SAF/MRBR

TO:	FROM :
SECRETARY or THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARCER.E\lEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST.SUITE 40	1536 COM,\!ANO OR, EE WINC. 3RO FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDRtWS Af'S.MD 2076!-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00116	

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 grants the requested relief.

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 heal th disorders was present for this board. The applicant's record of service included one Article 15, one Vacation of Non-Judicial  Punishment , four Letters of Repri mand and two Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included failure to report for duty on time (4x), failure to report to PT (3x), and sponsoring someone onto base using another person 's identification card.

The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He stated that his medical condition was not considered at the time of discharge.  The records indicate the applicant was diagnosed with insomnia and later Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).  The ORB found that the comments in the discharge package from the applicant's commander did not match what was in the medical records.  The commander stated that the applicant did not seek help for his medical condition until he was issued an Article 15. However, the records suggest that the applicant initially sought help on September 25, 2012 and the Article 15 was issued on February 13, 2013.  Although the Board does not condone applicant's misconduct, the Board finds sufficient mitigation based on the applicant's medical condition at the time of discharge to consider his d ischarge harsh.  As such, the Board majority grants upgrade of discharge to Honorable and change of reason and authority for discharge.

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 Honorabl e discharge and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title I 0, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief