AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COIJ!l($EL	Nf\ME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCAJ'(IZATION OF COUNSEL
Y£S	No
x
VOTE()FTDJ: BOARD
MEMBER   SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	+•	x
....

....

....

ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67.30

+•	x
+•	x
+•	x
+•	x
EXHIBITS SUBMITIED TO.TQt 'DO.ARD	'
1	ORDER APPOfNTCNG THE BOARD
2	APPLJCATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LElTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL' SRELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED ATTIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEARJNC DATE	CASE NUMBER

30 Mar 2016	FD-2015-00582
J\,l'l'IJCANT'SISSUEAND1liEBOARl>'S.DECISIONALRA  110NALEAl\EUJSQJSSEDON1l!EA T:fAOIEOAIR   fORCBDISCHARGEIUMEWBOARDD ;ECISIONAL'llAtTOHAUi.	,:
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 AFBCM.R.

+ CHANGE REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY
*Signal

(b) (6)

--·    --

INDO	.•

-	. ..

DATE	16	 	
-         - -

TO:	•"ROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF TH£ AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	15"COMMAND DR,££ WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX781S0-4742	ANDREWS MB,MD 207'2-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00582	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance  before the Discharge  Review Board  (ORB) 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 characterization, but grants the change of reason and authority for discharge.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Commission of a Serious Offense

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. The applicant 's record of service included one Article 15 for disobeying the lawful command of her superior commissioned officer by driving on base after her on-base driving privileges had been revoked and for violating a lawful order which revoked her on-base driving privileges.

The applicant contends that her discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  She claims that she should have been reprimanded, and not discharged, for repeatedly driving on-base after her on-base driving privileges had been revoked.  The ORB opined that the applicant was afforded ample opportunit ies to change her negative behavior and failed to do so.  Based on her willful disobedience of numerous orders not
to drive on base, the Board concluded that the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate and should not be changed.

However, based on the facts and circumstances presented, the Board also determined that the applicant's discharge more appropriately should have been for a pattern of misconduct and not for commission of a serious offense. The applicant's misconduct did not rise to the level of offenses typically warranting discharge for commission of a serious offense. Accordingly, the Board determined that the reason and authority for the applicant's discharge was inequitable and improper and should be changed.

The applicant also claimed that she was seeing a base psychologist for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after returning from a deployment.  However, her Service Treatment Record docs not indicate that she was diagnosed with PTSD.  Nor did the applicant provide proof that she had been diagnosed with PTSD. The Board highly recommends that if the applicant can provide additional documented information to substantiate this issue, then she should consider exercising her right to make a personal  appearance before  the Board.   If the applicant chooses to exercise this right, she should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of any inequ i ty or impropriety related to her PTSD.	

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the reason for the discharge i s more accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC  1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief