AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVJCE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MlDDLE I   lTIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARAN CE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COU!'ISlL	NAME Of COUNSEL Al'ID OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS Al'ID OR ORCANIZATION or COUNSEL
V"&S	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
-(b)(6)	x
-
-	x
x
-
x
-
x
-
ISSUES	A93.23	INDEX NUMBER	A67.90	EXHIBITS SUBMITrED TO THE BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TL'-1£ OF PERSONAL   APPEARANCE'.
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARINC DATE	CASt NUMDER

13 Jul 2016	FD-2015-00630
APPLICANT'SISSUE ANOThlE BOARD'SDECIS!Ol'IALR.ATIOl'ALEARE DISCUSSEDONTHllATIACRED AIRRIRCE DISCHAllGl!RSVIBW BOARD DECISIONAL llATIONALE

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision othe Board , the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel. and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)

-	JNDORSE!\1ENT	DATE: '8/J/1:916

TO:	FROM:
SAFIMRBR	SECR&TARV OFnu:AIR FORCE P&RSONNF.L COUNCii.
AIR FORCE DJSCHARCE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40

15.15 COMMAND DR, EE WING,3RD FLOOR

RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDRtWS AYB, ID Zll162 7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-Y2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00630	

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 - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline. The applicant's record of service included: two Article l 5s; two Letters of Reprimand; one Letter of Admonishment and one Letter of Counseling. Her misconduct included: failing to go to appointed place of duty on several occasions; making a false statement to a Noncommissioned Officer; failing to go to appointed place of duty at the prescribed time; failing to participate in a command directed mental health evaluation; threatening to kill an NCO; leaving place of duty without permission; having an unsatisfactory monthly weight/body check and failing to adhere to weight and body fat measurement program standards.

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.

As justification in support of her request, the applicant states the following:
1.	She had medical problems that made her unfit for duty.
2.	The medical records reviewed in her case were not hers
3.	She was discharged within months of making a report to the first sergeant.
The applicant states she was admitted to a mental ward less than 2 weeks before being discharged and that she was very sick at the time but did not know the cause of her illness. She now knows that she suffered from "PCOS and Hypothyroidism."

The Board determined that although the applicant's mental health condition may have been a contributing factor in regards to the misconduct, they did not find that it prevented her from adhering to military standards or from being subjected to discharge actions. The Board found that the applicant's condition was unsuiting rather than unfitting.  Disorders that are unsuiting for, or interfere with, military service are managed administratively through the patient's chain of command IAW AFI 36-3206. Unsuiting disorders must not be confused with disorders that render a member medically unfit for duty.  The applicant's contentions in regards to her medical records and making a report with first sergeant were found to be unsubstantiated  due to lack of evidence.  The ORB determined that the misconduct was a significant	

departure from the conduct expected of all military members. 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. 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 her 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