AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OJ<'SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, Jo'fRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	x	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COIJNSEL	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIUTION Ot' COUNSEL
YES	N	(b) (6)	(b) (6)
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER     SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	X*+

X*+

X*+

x•+

X*+
ISSUES	A94.54	!Nl>l!.X NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMITI'ED TOTHE BOARD  	
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFCCATION
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	CASE NUMBER

17 Aug 2016	FD-2015-00497
APPUCANT'SISSUEANDll!E BOARD'SDllClSION.AL l10NALl!AlUl DISCUSSED JliEATTACl!a> AIRFORCEDISCHAllGl!ltE\llEW BOARDDEOSJONALR.ATIONALE.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

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

* CHANGE RE CODE

'(b) (6)

-	/',,-._	- -

+ CHANGE REAS.O.....N... _AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY

..	---
INDORSEMENT	DATE:  9/612616
TO;	FROM:

c STREET WEST,surrE 40

SAF/MRBR	Sl:CRETARY OF THE AIJt FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISC!f.ARGE REVIEW BOARD
550	15.JS COMMAND DR. EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB,MD 20761-1001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00497	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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 applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Joint Base Andrews, MD, on August 17, 2016.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 5: Applicant's additional medical documents

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 was discharged for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions (MDI) with service characterized as Under Honorable Conditions (General). The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to exan1ine 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's record of service included two Article l 5s, two Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included failure to go to duty on time (4x), falling asleep in class (2x), failure of block two test, and failure to obey a lawful order.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the equity or propriety of his discharge.  The applicant states that he believes he deserves a second chance despite his misconduct so that he may reenlist back into the military.  The applicant also claims that the MDI for which he was discharged were documented misunderstandings  and that his performance was never questioned and should not reflect on his overall potential as an Airman.  The DRB found no evidence to support the applicant's claim of his misconduct being a misunderstanding.   The Board opined that, through the administrative actions taken, the applicant  had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset
the positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

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 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, 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.
In 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