AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME or SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b)(6)	GRADE	
TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW	
COUNSl:L	NAMJ; OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL	
VES	No			
		(b)(6)	

MEMBER SITTING	VOTE OF THE BOARD	
	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
(b)(6)		x					
		x					
		x					
		x					
		x					
ISSUES	A30.30	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMfITED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
HEARING DATE

11 Aug 2016	CASE N\JMB&R

FD-2015-00274			
APPLICANl'SISS\JEANDnllll!OARD'SDECISIOMALRA    110NALBARRDISC\JSSEDONTHEA  1TACHEDAIRFORCEl)[SCHAlllJflREVIE\VBOARDDECSIONAL       RAT!ONALE.	
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)	
INDORSEME1''T	DATE: 812312016	
TO:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	FROM:
SEClltTARY OF TifE Alli FOllCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
IS35 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD l0762-7001	
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00274	

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.

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

Pursuant to l 0 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.

FINDING : After a review of the record, the Board unanimously voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.

DISCUSSION : The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct. 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 presumpt ion, 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's record of service included
one Article 15 for bei ng absent from his unit and failing to adhere to proper leave procedures.
The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. He claims that he was an outstanding performer who after being deployed and diagnosed with PTSD, made bad decisions. After a thorough review of the record and the information supplied by the applicant, the DRB determined there is sufficient evidence to support his claim of inequity.  Although the Board does not condone applicant's misconduct, the Board finds sufficient mitigating factors that warrant an upgrade to the discharge
characterization. The Board found that the nexus between the applicant's mental health and misconduct was not appropriately considered at the time of discharge.  As such, the ORB grants an upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable.

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 Honorable characterization under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 1553.

Attachment : Examiner's Brief