AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT CASE NUMBER FD-2019-00430 GENERAL: The applicant was discharged on 15 Sep 2004 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a(n) General discharge for Misconduct. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable. The board was conducted on 17 Oct 2019. 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. Pursuant to 10 USC ยง1553, the board included a member who is a psychiatrist/ psychologist 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. 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 an Article 15 and a vacation of suspended nonjudicial punishmen. His misconduct included: failure to go to prescribed place of duty/stay awake on post and dereliction of duty. The applicant made no contentions that the discharge was inequitable/improper. Applicant is simply requesting the upgrade so he can participate in Post 911 educational benefits that he paid and rightfully earned during the first year of service. The DRB reviewed the applicant's entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. The board understood the applicant's present service characterization renders him ineligible for Department of Veteran Affairs education benefits. However, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade. 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. It found the seriousness of the applicant's willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of his service. 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 his request was not approved. The DRB results were approved by the board president on 7 Apr 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)