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
,•· ·.:. COUfil!L;·.	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESSAND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSSI.
YES	No
x

-(b)(6)
-

.....

,.	·.	·; ·vqr · rft:'.	·:; j .-):.:::;::· \ ;! .  ;:.::.;
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x
x

t-
x
.....
x
ISSUES	A94.54	INDEX NUMBER	A67.10	.EXHIBITSSUBTT!)TQ 'rl,i'.EJ.J<1ARi:f.·;    ':;,:'._JI ,·'.   l
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRlEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL' S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDffiONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

IJEARINO DATE	CASE NUMBER

05 Oct 2016	FD-2016-00040
.·}'	;	.	· . fUS	O	TrA·  FOR Dl.SSJlE.	;	;! ·;;/;- r· ; · ·::. .?fifi:'l
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 AFBC:tv!R.

(b)(6)

f::;:·>'·. ':" ':.'  ....t', ,':'. : :)1 : .: ;,;. · "'·>·'-.:::•';"'. ..··:'.,: JJ,,   .l\>')A.l)J!.1 1: . ... : .. :.. ..	; ··:	"	....	· '1:'l··..&,'{  t-..y · ..... ·:":";./·.,/··/:i'.:·i:;·:' i.'I
TO:	FROM:

SAFIMRBR

SECRETARY OFTI!EAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCS DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR,EEWING,3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPHAFB, TX781504742	ANDREWS AFB, MD l076:Z..7001

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

----------	---------	------	-- ---- - ---·

I	. .	,	,
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00040	

GENEJµL:   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.
'	'

FINDING: ;After a review of the record, the Board voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.	·

DISCUSSION: 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 applicant's record of service included: two Article 15s; one Letter of Reprimand; and one Letter of Counseling. Her misconduct included: wrongfully having sexual intercourse with a man not her husband; being incapacitated for the proper performance of duties due to wrongful previous overindulgence in intoxicating liquor; failing to make any effort to pay accumulated charges on her government trayel 'card; and failing to report to physical training and work.

The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process to determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The applicant states that her discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident. After a thprough review of the record and input from the medical physician, the majority of the board members concluded that the applicant's misconduct was due to·family and personal problems in which affected the ability to serve satisfactoriiy. Although the Board does not condone the applicant's misconduct, the Board found that the characterization of discharge ryceived by the applicant was found to be inequitable.

A discharge is upgraded ortly if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorcmgh review of the record, the Board found sufficient 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 and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge under the provisions of 10 USC §1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief