AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00692	
					
The applicant was discharged on 16 May 07 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct.  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 board was conducted on 4 Feb 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 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 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, several Letters of Reprimand, and a few Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included: 30 days Delinquent on GTC; sleeping on duty; late for duty; failed to pay GTC debts; failed to pay Star Card; failed to pay debts/ignored debt collectors; signed an official statement known to be false with the intent to deceive; left assigned place of duty without authority; dereliction of duty.

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 states that the discharge he received does not define the service he performed. He explains that during his time, he constantly displayed a positive work ethic and he did serve per the core values. He continues to state that as a civilian, he continues to serve his community. The member states that there was no misconduct and that he was discharged for failing to pay a cell phone bill. He explains that he lost track of the bill in the midst of a divorce and there was no willful negligence, malice or misconduct in the true sense. He states that he needs this discharge upgrade for his children’s future. 

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 concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.    

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 to substantiate his contentions, the board recommends he exercise the right to make a personal appearance before the DRB or 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 4 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)