AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b)(6)	HEARING DATE
2017-03-20	CASE NUMBER
FD-2016-
00120	
TYPE
General	x	PERSONAL APPEARANCE		NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
COUNSEL	l'A!l!E OF COU!'iSEL AND OR ORG..\l'\IZATIO!'	ADDRESS M"D OR ORG..\J\1ZATI01'OF COU!'iSEL

'	
Yes	No			
	x			
MEMBER SITTING

(b)(6)		VOTE OF THE BOARD	
		HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
ISSUES	INDE".\:NUMBER	EXHIBITS SUB!\UTTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDillONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF  PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AITAOIED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	
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)

SIGNATURE OFBOARD  PRESIDENT	DATE:  5/3/2017	
TO:
SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742	FRO!\!:
SECRETARY OF 1BEAIR FORCE PERSONJ\"EL COuNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BO,'\RD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE Th1NC,3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB,!l!D 20762-7001	
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00120	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable.

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.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), via video teleconference between Joint Base Andrews, MD, and Joint Base San Antonio, TX on 20 March 2017. A witness was present and testified on the applicant’s behalf.

No additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing.

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 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 (failing to obey a no contact order), three Letters of Reprimand (failing to obey no contact order causing disturbance at fitness center, failing to notify supervisor of medical appointment, and reporting late to physical training), and one Letter of Counseling (failing to show for mandatory formation).

The applicant contends that her General service characterization hinders her employment opportunities and renders her ineligible to receive educational benefits; therefore, enduring difficulties supporting herself and her two children. The applicant also claims she was sexually assaulted by a male servicemember, but never reported the incident. After a review of the records, testimony from the applicant and witness, and liberal consideration to the sexual trauma and misconduct, the Board found a lack of clinical association between the sexual trauma and the misconduct. The Board concluded that the characterization of the applicant’s service was appropriate based on the misconduct.

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 is aware that the present service characterization renders the applicant ineligible for these benefits; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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