AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INlTIAL)

GRADE

(b) (6)

PERSONAL APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

(b) (6)

x	RECORD REVIEW
J\DOUSS AND OR ORGA!\17..ATIONOF COUNStL

(b) (6)
·"/':.;:,·   ------ -	.. . .	.. --··· -
...'•:,/     .

(b) (6)

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER
x•

x•
x•

DENY

A94.24

INDEX NUMBER

A94.23

X*

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEFOF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

KEARINC DATE	CASE NUMBER

12 Oct 2016	FD-2015-00648
--	- -
'

Case heard in Washington. D.C.

-

.---	
-   .'		

- --	---- -	- --- --	-	-  -
.
.	J   .•	\.

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

+ CHANGE REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY

(b) (6)

1- - -	--   . .	- - . . -	_, - : -- ---	- -- - -	. -

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR
SSOC STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH  AFB.TX78!50-4742

StCRETARY orllt£ AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DlSCHARG£ REVIEW BOARD 1$15COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00648	

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

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.

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

FINDING: After a review of the record, the Board unanimously voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.

DISCUSSION: 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: two Records oflndividual Counseling, three Letters of Counseling, and six Letters of Reprimand. Her misconduct included multiple instances of failing to obey orders to include a verbal no contact order, arriving late to work on various occasions, failing to route a leave request, and several instances of disrespecting NCOs/SNCOs.

The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because of her decorated and stellar military history. Also, she contends the discharge was improper due to the abuse and anxiety she experienced from her chain of command. The applicant states that the abuse and excessive intimidation stems from Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010.

The applicant appeals to the Discharge Review Board (DRB) for a change in her discharge pursuant to the September 20, 2011 memorandum from Clifford L. Stanley, Under Secretary of Defense, to Secretaries of the Military Departments on "Correction of Military Records Following Repeal of Section 654 of Title 10, United States Code." The record indicated applicant was discharged with a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary Infractions. The Discharge Review Board may grant requests based on the aforementioned memorandum repealing the Department of Defense "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy when the Board finds the discharge was based solely on this policy.  Upon review of the applicant's entire record, the Board determined a change to the narrative reason and authority for the discharge are justified.

After a thorough review of the record, the Board found evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization and change the reason for the discharge.

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.	

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority under the provisions of 10 USC §1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief