AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2017-00331	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 25 Nov 03 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 26 Jul 18.  

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 assisted by counsel in preparing the application.    

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553, the board included a member who is a 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 Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 3K.

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 narrative 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’s record of service included one Article 15, seven Letters of Reprimand, and seven Records of Individual Counseling.  His misconduct included:  failure to go to appointed place of duty at prescribed time (x4); failure to obey/adhere to a direct order (x3); failure to adhere to personal appearance standards; derelict in the performance of duties (x2); failure to comply with standards by not cleaning dorm room; failure to refrain from sleeping during duty hours (x2); failure to obey a lawful order; and failure to complete volume one of Career Development Course.  

Due to evidence of a mental health condition found in the applicant’s medical record, the board considered the case based on the liberal consideration standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and/or 10 USC §1553.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because his misconduct was a result of insomnia and oversleeping.  The applicant accepts responsibility for his actions.  He believes that if he were given an opportunity to correct his behavior at the time, then he would have corrected the behavior and returned to military service.  The applicant is currently employed as a State Trooper, and believes that he should not have to endure the punishment of his mistake any longer.

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.

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 8 Aug 18.  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