AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE LMTIAL)	GRADE

(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL   APPEARA NCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNS&L	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
Y£S	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTl-IC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x

x
x
x
ISSUES	A03.07	INDt:.X Nl.MBER	A67.l0	EXHlBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TCME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANC E HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

13 Jul 2016	FD-2015-00503
APPLICANTS ISSUEAND THE BOARD'S DECISK>NAL AATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON UtE ATTAC'HED AIR fORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW 80ARD DECISIONAI.. RATIONALE

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)

-FR0}1:

TO:

INDORSEMENT

.

DATE: 81812016

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARV QFTHEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR t"OR CEDISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40	ISJS COMMAND DR,EE WINC, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781504742	ANDREWS AFB. MO ?0762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00503	

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 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 discharge.

DISCUSSION : The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The applicant's record of service included: one Article 15; one Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment; two Letters of Reprimand and three Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included: failing to report to duty in a timely manner (4x); failing to keep his dorm room clean (2x); reckless driving and failing to obey the posted speed limit. 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 there is substantial doubt that he would have received the same discharge under current policy. He believes his early termjnation from the Air Force should have been Honorable due to his medical condition at the time of discharge. He claims that he was unfairly punished for having mental health issues and was prescribed medication that did not allow him to complete his term of service. After review of the record, to include a review of available records by a mental health professional, the Board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety in the applicant's discharge. The DRB noted that the many instances of documented misconduct supported the commander 's action to discharge the applicant and that the discharge was found legally sufficient after legal review. The applicant's medical issues were considered at the time and not found to mjtigate his accountability for his misconduct. The DRB's review also did not find that the applicant's medical condition supported there was impropriety or inequity in his discharge. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a departure from conduct expected of all military members and that the characterization of his service as (General) Under Honorable Conditions was appropriate. A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.

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. The Board therefore determines there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment : Examiner's Brief