AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2018-00464	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 29 Sept 14 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Honorable discharge for Non-Retention on Active Duty.  The applicant appealed for a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 18 Oct 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 deny the applicant’s request to change the discharge narrative reason and to change the 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 four Letters of Reprimand.  His misconduct included:  financial irresponsibility, poor professional image, tardiness/no shows, failure to maintain personal hygiene and quarters.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable/improper because he opted for early separation and was given an incorrect Reenlistment Code, he feels this code was not reflective of his service.  The DRB concluded the Commander denied the member the ability to reenlist on the AF 418 due to his various disciplinary actions.  The applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The member did not appeal the decision.   

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 1 Nov 2018.  If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to:  
Air Force Review Boards Agency
Attn: Discharge Review Board
1500 West Perimeter road, Suite 3700
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief