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- 00435	
TYPE		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				*	
						
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 at JB Andrews, MD.

*Narrative reason

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.
(b) (6)	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00435	

GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 27 Mar 14 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his 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 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 psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with training on mental health issues connected with post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI), and/or 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 3 to 2 to approve the applicant’s request to upgrade his 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 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, two Letters of Counseling, and three Letters of Reprimand, and multiple memoranda for record. His misconduct included failure to go at the prescribed time to his place of duty, failure to attend multiple appointments, failing multiple fitness assessments, failure to have required gear for training, and failure to pay his government travel card.

The applicant presented no contentions regarding the equity or propriety of his discharge. Instead, he cited his desire to receive G.I. Bill benefits as the justification for the service characterization upgrade.

After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, the DRB found evidence to indicate he suffered from severe migraine headaches over an extended period of time. These headaches negatively impacted his ability to perform his duties and had a direct link to most of his disciplinary issues. The board found substantial evidence that documented the ineffective results of his medical care and determined the severity and ongoing nature of his medical condition negatively impacted his capability to serve. Therefore, it concluded the discharge was inequitable and upgraded his service characterization to Honorable

The minority view of the board was that there was not conclusive evidence to indicate the applicant’s medical issues contributed to all his disciplinary issues.  Further, the minority believed if the applicant’s capability to serve was severely impacted by his migraines, he would have indicated this in his responses to his Article 15, Letters of Counseling, and Letters of Reprimand, as well as his application to the DRB. The minority was not convinced of a clear nexus between the applicant’s medical condition and his misconduct.	

After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychologist/psychiatrist/physician, 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 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. The board did not change the reason for discharge or the reenlistment eligibility code.

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