AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2021-00084	
					
The applicant was discharged on 13 Jul 06 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Pattern of 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 applicant was represented by counsel.    

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 4 May 21.  No witnesses were present to testify on the applicant’s behalf. 

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 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 a couple of Article 15s and a couple of Letters of Reprimand.  His misconduct included:  disobeying a direct order/argumentative to assigned preceptor; left duty section w/o permission from instructor/violated crew rest policy; absent without authority/disrespectful in language and deportment during performance evaluation session; wrongfully use provoking and reproachful words; stepping towards security forces member while in performance of his duties and twice refusing to comply with his direction to halt. 

The applicant and counsel contend inequity. They state that he has paid for his misdeeds. He has matured and acknowledges that he could have acted more mature and professional during the incidents. They state that there are several character statements in which they discuss his excellent character, compassion, teamwork, discipline and dedication. They state that the collateral consequences are too harsh, at almost 15 years later, he still suffers the effects. They state that he has not been involved in any negative incident since his discharge. The member and counsel state that he has been rehabilitated and that his misconduct was youthful indiscretion. The member concludes that he is not trying to change his discharge to gain any monetary benefits. He states that he needs the change so that it does not continue to prevent him from achieving his goals and pursuing his dreams. 

The DRB was pleased to see the applicant has been successful since leaving the Air Force.  However, the Board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant any changes to the discharge. It 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 reviewed the Wilke memo and the discharge was consistent with current Air Force policy on administrative separation.  The Board therefore concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.

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.

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 18 May 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  

Instructions on how to appeal to AFDRB or AFBCMR can be found at https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)