AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2017-00609	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 7 Oct 15 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge in lieu of trial by court martial.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to General and a change to his reenlistment eligibility code. 

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Joint Base Andrews, MD, on 31 Jul 18.  A witness was present and testified on the applicant’s behalf. 

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 and to change his reenlistment eligibility code.  It also voted not to change his discharge narrative reason.

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 being charged with abusive sexual contact for touching two female Airmen without their consent.     

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident during his nearly three years in service.  He also believed his positive contributions while serving, to include multiple deployments, outweighed the negative aspects of his service.  Finally, he completely denied the charges filed against him.    

Despite the applicant’s denial of committing the offenses he was charged with, the DRB did not find any conclusive evidence to support his contention.  It noted the member requested, and was granted, approval to be discharged in lieu of facing a trial by court-martial.  The board concluded the applicant’s misconduct was a significant departure from the conduct expected of all Airmen.    

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 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