AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST, MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b) (6)	HEARING DATE
2017-07-26	CASE NUMBER FD-2016- 00429	
TYPE
General		PERSONAL APPEARANCE	X	NON-PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND/OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND/OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL	
Yes	No			
	
X			

BOARD MEMBERS	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(S) AND THE BOARD’S DELIBERATIONS ARE SUMMARIZED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

* - Narrative Reason
(b) (6)	

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, AUG 17	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00429	

GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 5 Feb 14 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Other). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization to Honorable.  The board was conducted on 26 Jul 17.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), but declined and requested 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 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 unanimously to approve the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 3K.

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 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 two Article 15s. Her misconduct included failing to refrain from providing alcohol to a person under the age of 21, violating a no contact order given by a superior commissioned officer, violating a no contact order given by a noncommissioned officer (NCO), wrongfully communicating a threat to an NCO, driving under the influence of alcohol (2x), and being incapacitated for the proper performance of her duties due to intoxication.

Due to evidence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to alleged military sexual trauma found in the applicant’s medical record, the board considered the case based on the liberal consideration standard required by 10 USC §1553.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable due to her mental health issues and because the misconduct was a direct result of a military sexual assault. She indicated she made repeated requests for reassignment to a new unit that were denied by leadership, even though the alleged offender was within her immediate chain of command. The applicant stated she was diagnosed with depression and PTSD while in treatment at a rehabilitation facility.

After a thorough review of the record, the board did not find evidence of impropriety. However, the board found evidence that the discharge was inequitable. It determined relief was warranted based on the applicant’s entire service record and evidence that family and personal problems mitigated the reason for discharge and negatively impacted the applicant’s ability to serve satisfactorily. The board also noted changes to AFI 90-6001, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program, since the discharge occurred.	

Specifically, paragraph 11.3.1.1. states “Victims may request a temporary or permanent unit transfer, a temporary PCA, or a PCS. The victim’s commander (or equivalent) shall expeditiously process a transfer request from a unit or installation.” Had the applicant’s reassignment request been granted, it may have led to a different outcome.

CONCLUSION: The board found neither the evidence of record, nor that provided by the applicant substantiated an impropriety. However, sufficient evidence existed to convince the board the discharge was inequitable. Therefore, the board determined the overall characterization of the applicant’s service was more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for discharge was more accurately described as Secretarial Authority.  Additionally, the reenlistment eligibility code was changed to 3K.

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 24 Aug 17. 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