AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAl\'1£ OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b)(6)	HEARING DATE
2017-02-09	CASE NUMBER
FD-2015-
00360	
TYPE	x	PERSONAL APPEARANCE		NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
COUNSEL	K-\ME OFCOUl\SEL AND OR ORC..\J<"IZATIO!'

(b)(6)	ADDRESS.-\1\1> OR ORC.-\1\"JZ.ATION OFCOUNSEL	
Yes	No			
				
MEMBER SITTING

(b)(6)		VOTE OF THE BOARD	
		HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	

-				
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OFNOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL Fil.E	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITTONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF  PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND lHE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON TiiBATIACHBD AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)

SICl'AllrRE OFBO.\RD PRESIDENT	DATE: 2122/2017	
TO:
SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742	FROM:
SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERS01'1'  L COUNCll. AIR FORCE DISCH.o\RCE REVIEW BOARD
!!J' S COMMAND DR, EE \\'lNC,3RD FLOOR
.-\!\"DREWS AFB,MD ?076?-7001	
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00360	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable.

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553 this board included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiati·ist, or a physician with ti·aining on mental health issues connected with post ti·aumatic sh'essdisorder or ti·aumatic brain injmy and/or special ti·aining on mental health disorders.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Joint Base Andrews, MD, on Febmary 9, 2017.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: Attorney's Brief

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 waITant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION : 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 wananted. 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 applicant'srecord of service included one Article 15 and two Letters of Reprimand. His misconduct included: filing a fraudulent claim; providing a false official statement; and being derelict in the performance of his assigned duties.

The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Commission of Serious Offense. The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. He claims that while in the Air Force, he should have been diagnosed with Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) after his motorcycle accident He also states that he was young and immature and his TBI was contributed to his misconduct, lack of communication, and being misti·eated by his leadership within his unit. He also stated that the evidence supplied by his leadership for his discharge was inaccurate.

The DRB recognized that the applicant was 22 years of age when the discharge took place. The Board opined that the applicant was no younger than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to Air Force standards of conduct. However, 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 specialist, the Board found no indication that any mental health or TBI issues had an impact on the applicant'smisconduct or on his discharge. Additionally, the Board found no evidencetojustify 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.	

fu 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