AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVJEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER {LAST, FlRSf MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE	I	PERSONAL   APPEARAN  CE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUllS£L	NAM! OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANJZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x•

X*

x• x• x•
lSSU&S	A94.54	INDEX NU IB&R	A62.00	EXHIBITS SUBMilTEDTO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DlSCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASETO TifE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMrrfED AT TNE OF PERSONAL APPEARA  CE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARJNC DATE	CASE NUMBER

28 Sep 2016	FD-2016-00 089
APl'IJCAl'IT'S ISSUE AND 1llEBOARD'S DECISlONAL RATIONALE Alt£ DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE IU"-Vl&W BOARD Df:CISIONAL RATIONALE.
I
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.

*NaJTative Reason

(b) (6)

INDORSEMENT		DATE:  10/10/2016	
TO:	
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 4-0
RANDOLPH  AFB,TX78J50-4742	FROM:	
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WINC.lRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB. MD 207•2 7001	
AFHQ  FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE  DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD  DECISIONAL  RATIOALE	CASENVMBER

FD-2016-00089	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for characterization of her uncharacterized  entry level separation as General and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

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 I0 USC §1553 this board included a member who is a clinical psycho logist or psychiatri st, or a physician with training on mental health issues connected with post traumatic stress disorder or traumat ic 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 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 determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant received an Entry Level Separation for Fraudulent Enlistment. The applicant contends the discharge was improper because it was based on something her recruiter told her to do. She also claims that in order to further her career, she will need a change to her discharge characterization. The applicant submitted no issues regarding the equity or propriety of her discharge. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. The Board also found that the applicant signed a memorandum stating that she did not tell her recruiter about her history of asthma because she didn't know that she was diagnosed with it. Also, she didn't tell her recruiter about her history of depression because she didn't think it was a big deal.

The applicant served less than 180 days and, therefore, her service does not qualify for characterization as General. A discharge is upgraded on!y 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 m isconduct or on her discharge. Additionally, the Board found no evidence to just ify an upgrade of the discharge characterization or change of reason and authority for the discharge.

CONCJ,USION: 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 found no evidence to just ify characterizing the applicant's service or to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

Attachment:   Examiner's Brief