AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE 11T' TIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD  REVlEW
comim.	NAMZ OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCA.'ilZA11011	ADDRESS AND OR ORCAllJZ.ATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF TH£ BOARD
MEMBER   SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x x
x
x
ISSUES	AOl.00	L'iDEX NUMBER	A67.10	EXHIBITS SUBMTITED TO THI BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TOTHE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS St;. BMITrED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARAN CE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEAR.INC DATit	CAS8NUM8&11

13Jul 2016	FD-2015-00532
APPLJCANrS ISSUl!A!1DntEllOAllD'S DEClSIONAI..AATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON Til£ ATTACHED AIR FOltC£ lllSCHAllGI! REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RA'llONALI!

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)

,
t.

INDORSEMENT	DA'R:  7f141'281
FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRiTARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE l>ISCHARCE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535COMMAND DR, EE WINC, 3RD fLOOR
RAi".IDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AJ1ll, MD :2076:1-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00532	

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.

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 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 received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions. 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' s record of service included one Article 15 for driving under the influence, underage drinking and one Vacation of Suspended Nonjudical Punishment.

The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable.  He states his new commander initiated discharge and did not afford him the opportunity to appeal.  He contends his previous commander advised him that he would not continue with the discharge process because of his (applicant) turnaround  and expressed desire to remain in the service.  However, the applicant asserts, the new commander executed the discharge very quickly and ultimately did not afforded him an opportunity to inquire about the conflict between the information given by his initial commander and the action taken by his new commander.  He feels the misinformation cost him a career in the Air Force.

The Board found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in the applicant's discharge, to include, based on input from the voting psychiatrist , no evidence that mental health issues contributed to the discharge.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was 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.

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

Attachment: Examiner's Brief