AI R FORCE DISCHARG E REVI EW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM E OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST. FIRST MIOOLE INITIAL)	CRADE

(b)(6)
TYPE  HO	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME or COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANll.A TIO/I or COUNSEL YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
MEM BER SITTING	HON	GFN	UOTllC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x *#
x *# x *# x *#
x *#
ISSUES	A93.23	li OEX NlMOER	A31.00	EXBlBITSSUB\UITED TO TH£ BOARD
1  ORDER APPOl'NT!NG Tl IE OOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	 	
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL  FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBM ITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARAN CE
TAllE RECORD ING 01' PERSONA L APPEARANCE HEARJNG

HEARINC DATE	CASE NU\18ER

08 Jul 2016	FD-2015-00458
APPLICANT"$ ISSUl:A'.<0110: BOARD'S DllCISIONAL RATION'\l.EAR.6DISCUSSED  OS n£ ATTACHED AIR rCE OISC'HARGEREVlliW BOARD DECISIONAL RAT10"'A.Ui.

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 application to the AFBCMR.

RE Code * Narrative #

(b)(6)

lNDOKSt:Mt;NT	DATE:  &'112016
TO:	FRQ\1:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OFTII EAI R FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL

40

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST,  SU ITE	I SIS COMMAND DR,EE WINC,JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH   AFB, TX  78150-4742	ANDREWS f\rB,MD l.0761-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00458	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for a change to the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the re-enlistment 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.

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.

FINDING: The Board finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's narrative reason or re-enlistment code.

DISCUSSION: The applicant received an Honorable discharge for having a disability that existed prior to service. 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 that he was misdiagnosed  by the Air Force in regards to his mental health.  He claims that he was cleared by the Military Entrance Processing Station (MEPS) during his initial mental health screening prior to entry.  He also claims that his episode of irrational thoughts was an isolated incident.
After review of the records and advice from the mental health specialist, the DRB found evidence that the applicant suffered from mental illness prior to entry to the Air Force.  Although he was cleared by MEPS, the records indicate several entries of mental health treatment for conditions that existed prior to being admitted to the Air Force.  Furthermore, the narrative reason and re-enlistment code received, were found to be 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 specialist, the Board found no evidence to warrant a change of reason and authority for the discharge, or change to 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.

Inview of the foregoing findings, the Board found no evidence to justify a change to the re-enlistment code or to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

Attachment : Examiner's Brief