AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00399	

GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 11 Dec 13 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge due to Unsatisfactory Performance. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization to Honorable.  The board was conducted on 2 Nov 17.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), but declined and requested the board be completed based on a records only review. The applicant was not represented by counsel.

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553, the board included a member who is a clinical psychiatrist with training on mental health issues connected with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI), and training on mental health disorders.

The attached examiner’s brief (provided to applicant only), extracted from available service records, contains pertinent data regarding the circumstances and character of the applicant’s military service.

FINDING: The DRB voted 4 to 1 to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge characterization to Honorable.

DISCUSSION: The DRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge if such changes are warranted. If applicable, the board can also change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code. 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’s record of service included one Article 15. Her misconduct consisted of being derelict in the performance of her duties by willfully failing to pass a Spanish Cryptologic Language Analyst Course exam.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident.

The DRB recognized the applicant served approximately 19 months before the discharge was initiated and reviewed her entire service record. However, it concluded the seriousness of the applicant’s willful misconduct, specifically, intentionally failing a course exam, which she admitted to, offset the positive aspects of her service.

After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychiatrist, the DRB found no conclusive indication that any mental health issues had a direct impact on the applicant's misconduct or discharge.

CONCLUSION: The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge. Therefore, the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and her request was not approved.

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 7 Dec 17. If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to: SAF/MRBR (CITU), 550-C Street West, Suite 41, Randolph AFB, TX 78150-4743.	

Attachment: Examiner's Brief