·- - ·----- . - · .   --------------

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECpRD

,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

HEARING DATE
2016-11-10

CASE NUMBER
FD-2016-
00157

TYPE

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X	NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE

·-.COuNSEL;'.'· NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORCA'.llZATION
! .....· ,:_•·. .,...
Yes	No

ADDRESS Al'iD OR ORCANIZATIONOF COUNSEL

,.   ,...- _',
MEMBER SITTING	. . .;
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x x

1	I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FORREVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S.RELEASE TO THE BOARD

I

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITIED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	.
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING
-APi1coo·s'iill? w.D-	-q·.s or;crs!    AL RATIONALE AREmscusseo oNnmAnAciieo Am. FoRcB 01scHARoEREVIEW soARD 0Ecis10NAL RAnoNALE.
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.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 CS1REET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPHAFB , TX78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OF TH£ AIR. FORCE PERSONt.'EL COUt.'CJL AIRFORCE  OJSCHARGERE\IJEW BOARD 1535COMMAND DR,EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWSAFB, MD 10761.-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V)	Previous edition will be used

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00157	

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 rview 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 traun;iatic brain injury and/or special training on mental health diso.rders.

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 unles.s 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 di.schai:ge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  The applicant's record of service includes alleged violations of Article 125 (forcible sodomy), Article 128 (assault), and Article 134 (conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

The ·applicant received an Under Honorable Conditions General discharge for conduct Triable by Court Martial. The applicant claims that he requested the Discharge in Lieu of Court-Martial out of fear. He feels that at the time of discharge the Department of Defense was under pressure to make examples of individuals with charges of sexual nature. He contends that the General characterization does not accurately reflect his time served on active duty. The applicant also stated that he has been unfairly denied his education benefits as result of his discharge. The applicant requested and received a discharge under AFl36-3208, Chapter 4 in Lieu of Trial by Court.Martial. After a review of the record, the Board found insufficient evidence of impropriety or inequity that would warrant an upgrade. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct  was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to b 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 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 cnsistent 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.	·	

--------··-----r-·--	--- --

Attachment: Examiner's Brief