AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2020-00679	
					
The applicant was discharged on 2 Sep 11 with a Bad Conduct Discharge after being convicted during a Special Court-Martial. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to General/Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 21 Jan 21.  

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 §1553, 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 General/Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C / 3K.

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.  His misconduct included: AWOL

Due to evidence of  mental health conditions found in the applicant’s medical record, the board considered the case based on the liberal consideration standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and/or 10 USC §1553.

The applicant contends that his discharge is improper because he turned himself in at 16 years of service. He states he didn’t have to turn himself in. Instead, he would’ve stopped using substances and continued until retirement. He states it’s hard to get a job that requires him to submit his 214. 
The member states what led to his discharge. He started with panic attacks, anxiety and depression. He states he was afraid to be discharged medically so he kept it under wraps. He states his wife left and took his kids. He states that his son was diagnosed with autism and began the self-destructive path that led to discharge. He states he began to drink heavily, his second wife left him and so he hit rock bottom with alcohol and substance abuse. 

Upon review of an applicant’s Bad Conduct Discharge as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, the DRB may change the punitive discharge to an administrative discharge for the purposes of clemency, if warranted.  The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request.  The board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his military service.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate.
 
Upon review of the applicant’s service record, the board was not able to find any documentation regarding the discharge/court martial.  Since the board relies on the presumption of regularity, it concluded the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.  

After a thorough review of the service record and input from the board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found that the applicant’s mental health condition was a mitigating factor to the applicant's misconduct, however, it could not completely explain or excuse the misconduct sufficiently to warrant upgrading 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 board recommends the applicant exercise his right to directly appeal the DRB’s decision to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records by requesting clemency based on post-service activities and accomplishments. 

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 22 Jan 21.  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)