AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00580	

GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 17 Jul 15 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge for Misconduct (Sexual Perversion). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to General. The board was conducted on 2 Nov 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 psychiatrist with training on mental health issues connected with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI), and 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 unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to General.

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 was charged in a civilian court with eight felony counts of knowingly producing, possessing, possessing with intent to distribute, distributing, or viewing child pornography.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident and he had no other adverse actions during his time in service. He also contended he was discharged before being convicted of a crime.

The DRB noted the applicant's duty performance during his time in service as documented by his performance reports, awards and decorations, and other accomplishments. However, it concluded the applicant’s serious misconduct was an extreme departure from the conduct expected of all military members and clearly offset the positive aspects of his service. It also noted he pled guilty to some of the civilian charges and spend time in confinement.

After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychiatrist, 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 insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge. Therefore, the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved.	

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 7 Dec 17. If desired, 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