AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAM E OF SERVICE MEMB ER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAM£ OFCOUNS£t ANO OR ORGANIZAT ION	ADDRJ;SS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YF.S	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x
x x x
ISSUES	A94.53	INDEX NUMBER	A67.90	EXHIBITSSUBMfITED TO THE  BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFLCATlON
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADD ITIONAL EXHJBITS SUBM ITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

H £ARING DATF.	CASE NUMBER

03 Jun  2015	FD-2014-00592
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOAJlD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAllD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

Case heard in Washington , D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a persona l appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

(b) (6)	-

INOORSEMEl'ff	-

DATE: 6/19/2015	 	

SAF/MRBR

1'0:	FROM:
SECRETARY OF TIU;AIR FORCE PERSONNE COUNCI AIR FORCE OJSCHARG£ REVIEW BOARO
550 C STREET WEST, SUlTE 40	ls.IS COMMAJ'IO DR. EE WING. 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFS, MO 20762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00592	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge 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.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING : The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline.

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 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 . In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to 10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board . The applicant's record of service included two Article l 5s, and two Letters of Reprimand. Her misconduct included consuming alcohol while on-call, dereliction of duty by documenting false information in patient medical records, dereliction of duty by failing to label patient 's specimen, wrongfully communicating to an NCO information of pulling a knife and threatening a patient, disobeying a direct order, and providing false information to an NCO.

The applicant contends that the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  She stated that she was not given enough time to correct her behavior.  The DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken, the applicant had opportunities to change her negative behavior.   The Board found that the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The Board
concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions she made in her Air Force career.

The applicant also cited her desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits asjustification for upgrade. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, she signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on October 2, 2009) that she understood she must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of these benefits to the applicant; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to just ify 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.

Inview of the foregoing 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