AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
		HEARING DATE
2016-12-01	CASE NUMBER
FD-2016-00177	
TYPE		PERSONAL APPEARANCE		NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
COUNSL	NAMEOF COUNSELAND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANl.Zi\TIOl'I OFCOUNSEL	
Yes	No			
				
MEMBER SIITING		VQTE OF TiIE BOARD .	. . .	
		HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	

		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIBW OP DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OFNOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASETOTHE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TlME OF PERSONAL
APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OFPERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
APPLICAITT'S ISSUE AND THI!BOAAo'S DEclSIONAL RATIONAl.eA!\BOlSCUSSW ONTl!E AITACRJ:D l\JR FORC8 DIZCHl\ROlll\JMllW BOARD DECISl9NAJ.. RATIONl\Lll: .':	
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:
SAFIMJU3R
SSO C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX78150-4742	FROM:
SECRETARY 0FT1l£AIR FORCE PERSONNl!LCOllNctL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REY!£\Y BOARD
1535 COMMA!'.'D DR, a;WINO, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB,MD 207'l-70tl	

..	•: '"· J...':

I

1·
t

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	revious edition will be used

-------------·

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00177	

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 C?n 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 traUII!atic stress disorder or traumatic brain injW'y 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; tq 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 includes one Article 15 for wrongfully using Adderall.	· ·

The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Drug Abuse.   The applicant claims that she was picked on by her co-workers and supervisors for her weight gain.  She also claims that she turned to using Adderall as a quick way to lose weight, then became addicted.  She contends that she suffered from bi-polar disorder at the time of discharge.  She feels that her medical condition and harassment should have
been given more consideration.·The Board reviewed the entire record and documents submitted by applicant and deternlined that there was insufficient evidence to show a correlation between her medical diagnosis and work atmosphere to the misconduct. The DRB found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset the
·positive aspects of her duty performance. 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 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 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 forego4ig 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