AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b) (6)	HEARING DATE
2017-03-16	CASE NUMBER FD-2016- 00264	
TYPE		PERSONAL APPEARANCE	X	NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL	
Yes	No			
	
X			
MEMBER SITTING	VOTE OF THE BOARD	
	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
(b) (6)					X	
(b) (6)		X				
(b) (6)					X	
(b) (6)		X				
(b) (6)		X				
(b) (6)						
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL 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 ATTACHED 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 OF BOARD PRESIDENT	DATE: 5/15/2017	
TO:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	FROM:
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 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-2016-00264	

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 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 traumatic 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: After a review of the record, the Board majority voted to grant the relief of clemency 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: a Special Court- Martial (SPCM). Her misconduct included a charge of wrongfully using MDMA or some derivative thereof, commonly known as Ecstasy, a Schedule 1 controlled substance; to which she pled and was found guilty.

The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and the discharge process. The applicant received a Bad Conduct Discharge – Court Martial. The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because the punishment was too harsh for the crime. She states that she has been completely rehabilitated from using drugs and provided supporting documentation of her lifestyle change since separating from the Air Force. Due to the applicant receiving a Bad Conduct Discharge, the Board’s only form of relief is a consideration of clemency. The Board majority opined that evidence of outstanding post-service conduct in the form of marriage, children, documentation of community and church service, documentation of a drug-free lifestyle, and educational accomplishments provided a basis for a  more thorough understanding of the applicant’s performance and conduct. The Board majority concluded that the documentation submitted by the applicant provided sufficient justification to grant clemency relief.

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.

However, upon review of an applicant’s Bad Conduct Discharge as adjudged by a Special Court Martial, the Air Force Discharge Review Board review may extend only to a change in the discharge for purposes of clemency, if such is a warranted.  In view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that there exists an equitable basis to grant clemency.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief