AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE: ME:l\IBEH (L1\ST,FIRST MIOOLE INITIA L)
(b) (6)

GRAOE

AFSN/SSAN
(b) (6)

TYPE  GEN | _x	_I	PERSONA L APPEARANCE | _I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSI. | !'(,\ME OF COUNSEi, A:-10 OR ORGAl'il Z,\TION | AOORF.SSAl'iO OR ORGNl7.TI ON OF COUNSEL
YES | No | |
| x | |
MEMBER SITTING | VOTE OF THE BOARD
HON | GEN | UOTllC | OTHER | DENY
(b) (6) | | x | | | |
| x | | | |
| x | | | |
| x | | | |
| x | | | |
ISSUES	_A94.06 | INOF.X NI     IOf.H	_A _67.10 | EX HllUTS SUBMffrF:O TO TllE BOA W
I | ORDER APPOI NTING THE BOARD
2 | APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCllARGE
3 | LEHF.R OF NOTIFICATION
4 | BlUEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
| COUNSEL 'S RELEASE TO Tl IE BOARD

/\ 1)011 IUNAL EAi11131rs SUllMII 1 1.:0 /\ I llME OF
PERSONA i APl'EARANC'E

| TA PE REC'Ol OING or PERSONAL APPEARANCE IIEARING

llE.A RIN'C DATE

24 Feb 2015

C.-\ St:,,l 1 11n:R

FD-2014-00729

APPLANT'S ISSllE AN() Tl-IE DOARD·s DOCISIONAI  RATIONAL.£ ARE DlSC'USSC:D ON TllE ATTAC'llt:O AIR FORCE DISCllARCBRnvmw BOARD DECISIONAL R..- TIONALG.

Case heard in Wash ington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel. and the ri ght to subm it an appl ication to the AFRCMR .

(b) (6)

INl)()RSEM£NT | OATI<::   3/13/2015

TO:

SAF/ IRBR
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE -10
RANDOLPll AFl:l, TX 78150-4742

SECRF.TAR\'OFTllEAIR FORCE l'l:RSONNEL. C'OllNCIL AIR FORCE DISCl l ARGE RE\'1£11' BOARD
ISJ  \0\IM,\NO DR, f:t: \\'INC..RO n.001{
ANDRtWS Af-'U,Mr> lt762-7()01

AFHQ .FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-Y2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00729

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (ORB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB on February 24, 2015.

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

After a review of the record and testimony from the applicant, the Board unanimously voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.

FINDING:  The Board grants the requested relief.

ISSUE: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions

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 subm itted 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 failure to obey a no contact order.

The applicant contends that her discharge was inequi table because it was too harsh and based on an incident that involved domestic violence. The applicant accepted responsi bility of her actions regardi ng the Article
15, and acknowledged that she could have made better decisions lead ing up to the Article 15 incident.  The Board opined that the evidence contained in the record does support the applicant 's claim that the discharge was based on an isolated incident.  After tak ing into account of the applicant 's statements and a thorough review of the record, the ORB determined there is sufficient evidence to support the claim of inequ i ty.
Although the Board does not condone applicant's miscond uct, the Board finds that based upon the compelling statements of the applicant and supporting documents there was inadequate time for probation and rehabilitation following her A rticle 15. As such, the Board grants upgrade of discharge to honorable.

CONCLUSION : The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was inconsistent with the procedura l and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and finds the applicant was not provided full administrati ve due process.

The Board  concludes  that  the overall quality  of applicant 's service  1s more  accurately reflected  by  an Honorable discharge.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief