AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2017-00663	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 1 Mar 14 in accordance with AFI 36-3209 with an Honorable discharge for being Not Selected for Reenlistment.  The applicant appealed for a change to the discharge narrative reason and reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 3 May 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 not represented by counsel.    

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 change his discharge narrative and reenlistment eligibility code.

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 a civilian arrest for contributing to the delinquency of a minor.    

The applicant made no contentions that the discharge was inequitable or improper.  He stated he resigned his position due to personal issues, only to discover that there were no open slots for his AFSC when he attempted to reenlist.  He also claimed he was told his reenlistment eligibility code would be changed in approximately a year so he could reenlist.  

If the applicant was told his reenlistment eligibility code would be automatically upgraded at a later date, he was miscounseled.  A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, the DRB found no evidence to justify making any changes to the 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 23 Jul 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