AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COl.INSn	NAME OFCOUNSEL ANO OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANl:GATION  OFCOUNSEL
YFS	No
x
VOTE OF mE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x
x
IS'.lllES	A94.54	INDEX NUMBER	A67.90	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTIN G THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OP NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASETOTHE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARlNO

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

20 Jul 2016	FD-2015-00580
APPIJCANTSlSSUE AND lllJleoARD·s DECJSIONAL RATIONAl..E MtE DISCUSSED ON lllEATTAOIED AIR FORCE DISCflARGE RBVIEW BOARD DllCISIONAL RATKlNALE.

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)	-
-
-
INDORSEMENT	DATE:   81112016
TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	S8CRETARV OF Tilt AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

AIR FORCE DISCRARCE REVIEW BOARD 15.lS COMMAND DR,EE WING, JRD noQR

RANDOLPH AFB, TX78J50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 10162-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00580	

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 was discharged for Pattern of misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. 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 goverrunental 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 six Letters of Reprimand, four Records of Individual Counseling, and three Letters of Counseling. Her misconduct included using her military identification card to acquire free food from the dining facility while living off base and receiving BAS, failing to go to scheduled medical appointments (2x), failing to notify supervisor about leaving duty location after being verbally counseled for the same behavior, failing to obey dress and appearance standards (2x), failing to report to the emergency room after contacting supervisor of eye pain, failing to report on time for duty, failing to obey an noncommission officer to report for duty, failing to correctly assemble buffalo chopper which damaged the drive spindle, causing $800.00 of damage, failing to properly complete shift change checklist, driving without a driver's license, and wrongfully had a relationship with a man not her husband.

The applicant contends the discharge was improper because it was not done correctly. She feels that her misconduct referenced in her disciplinary documentation should have been removed from her record when she changed units. The applicant also cited her desire to receive GI Bill benefits asjustification for upgrade. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. The DRB noted that the member' s personnel record follows the member when they do a permeant change of assignment (PCA) versus the record removed if the member does a permeant change of station (PCS). In this case, the applicant performed a PCA from one unit to another within the same base. Therefore the record followed her to the new unit. The DRB also noted that the applicant had served five years before the discharge was initiated, but concluded that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions she made in her Air Force career. The Board is aware that the applicant's present service characterization renders her ineligible for Department of Veteran Affairs education benefits ; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.	

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.

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