AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2019-00360	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 01 Dec 2013 in accordance with AFI 36-3209 with a(n) General discharge.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization to Honorable and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 19 May 2020.  

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 upgrade her 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 several Letters of Reprimand for assaulting a law enforcement agent, failure to pay unauthorized government travel card (GTC) charges and failing to appear in a timely manner. 

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because her official court documents regarding the assault was dismissed in court and that the final disposition stated “No Action.”  The applicant believed she deserved a second chance despite her misconduct in order to have the opportunity to serve in the military again.  She takes accountability for her actions and notes that since her discharge, she has completed her degree, provided for her family and gained stable employment.

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change her negative behavior.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions she made during her Air Force career.   The DRB was pleased to see the applicant has been successful since leaving the Air Force.  However, the board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant any changes to the discharge.  

Upon review of the applicant’s service record, the board was not able to find any documentation regarding the discharge.  Since the board relies on the presumption of regularity, it concluded the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.  

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 her request was not approved. 

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 15 Jun 20.  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
3351 Celmers Lane
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)