AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00657	
					
The applicant was discharged on 8 May 20 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference using VIDYO Cloud Connect on 9 Feb 21.  No witnesses were present to testify on the applicant’s behalf.

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 his discharge characterization to 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, a vacation of suspended non-judicial punishment, a few Letters of Reprimand, and a Letter of Counseling…  His misconduct included:  disorderly conduct; failed to report for duty; failed portion of duty position evaluation; failed to report for training; provided a falsified forged document from MDG and lied about being there; late for mandatory training; failure to stop at a stop sign; signed in to TAPs course and left without authorization; failed to report to TAPs course on time; failed to follow COVID19 contingency order by consuming alcohol; failed to report hospitalization from consumption of alcohol IAW PRAP reporting procedures.

The applicant states no contentions. He is requesting a change because he believes he deserves a second chance to defend his country. He states he’s willing to join any branch that will accept him so that he can prove himself worthy. In the personal appearance, the member stated that he felt he was treated unfairly and received worse punishments than others. The member stated that he felt confused and emotionally damaged from the acts of covert racism. He stated that he filed IG complaints and congressional requests but nothing ever came from them. 

The applicant believed he deserved a second chance despite his misconduct in order to have the opportunity to serve in the military again. 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 took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, awards and decorations, and other accomplishments. The Board found the seriousness of the applicant’s willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of his service. They concluded that there was not enough evidence to support the applicant’s contentions of inequity.

After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found no conclusive indication that any mental health issues had a direct impact on the applicant's misconduct or discharge.

If the applicant can provide additional information such as copies of the IG complaints and/or congressional submissions that would substantiate his contentions, the board recommends he exercise the right to directly appeal the DRB’s decision to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.  

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 17 Feb 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)