AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00228	
					
The applicant was discharged on 11 Oct 2019 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge for Misconduct (Commission of a Serious Offense).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 7 May 2020.  

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 4 to 1 to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization, to change the discharge narrative reason, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code.

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 contended the discharge was inequitable and improper and asserts his command did not believe the evidence he submitted.  He requests an upgrade to reflect his otherwise 13 years of satisfactory service.  The military record reflects the applicant was an Air Force Recruiter and he engaged in an unprofessional relationship with a potential recruit in violation of Air Force policy.  For the offense, the command referred court-martial charges to a special court-martial.  The applicant subsequently entered into an alternate disposition agreement with the Special Court-Martial Convening Authority to accept non-judicial punishment for the charged offenses, and waived his right to an administrative discharge board in return for dismissal of the court-martial.   The Board concluded that the applicant made an informed decision when he entered into the alternate disposition agreement and that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  

The minority view of the Board found that the discharge characterization was inequitable and should be upgraded to an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge.  The minority found that while the applicant should have taken numerous steps after learning of the potential recruit’s interest in the Air Force, to include seeking guidance from his leadership and providing another recruiter, the minority found that the conduct did not rise to the level to warrant an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.  The minority found that while recruiter misconduct must be taken seriously, this particular fact pattern did not warrant the most severe characterization, as it involved a consensual relationship with a person who expressed interest in the Air Force only after the applicant had established a relationship with the person, and who ultimately did not pursue the path of joining the Air Force.  To the minority, this was not the type of misconduct an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge is intended to capture.  

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 2 Jun 2020.  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)