AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00124	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 20 Feb 14 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.  The board was conducted on 14 Apr 20.  

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 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 two Article 15’s, one vacation of suspended nonjudicial punishment, five Letters of Reprimand, and two Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included:  failure to go at prescribed time to appointed place of duty (x7); failure to exhibit professional behavior, military bearing, or respect for a Non-Commissioned Officer; failure to obey an order; failure to obey dress and appearance standards; failure to maintain dormitory room within cleanliness standards; and absent himself from place of duty.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because he suffered from undiagnosed sleep apnea.  He believes that since his leadership was unaware of the condition, they saw it as misconduct.  The applicant states that he was diagnosed with sleep apnea after discharge, and has been receiving treatment from the VA.  The applicant submitted appointment letters for sleep apnea treatment with VA.

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

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 23 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)