AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00761	
					
The applicant was discharged on 22 Nov 19 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Serious Offense).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The board was conducted on 11 Mar 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 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 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 a Special Courts-Martial, an Article 15 and a Letter of Counseling.  His misconduct included:  pinch nose/grab neck of another Airman; violation of a protective order; damaged government property; lied when asked about damage to property.

The applicant states that his records reflect the honorable service and conduct that he upheld until being targeted and mistreated by multiple service members that held very high positions in leadership. The member continues to say that he sought help multiple times from other agencies such as IG and JAG to have some corrective light and action to those who were abusing their power. The member states that because he was security forces, he didn’t receive assistance with his issues. The member states that he endured prejudiced encounters and unjust punishments that affected his work and personal life. He states that he has been diagnosed with depression from the VA from the events that took place. The member explains that the investigation and punishment that he received was unjust and biased and that OSI did several procedures and tactics that reflect a misrepresentation of integrity.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request. 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 could not find records of IG or JAG encounters and the serious nature of the applicant’s misconduct does not support an upgrade to honorable service. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate.

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 18 Mar 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)