AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00031	
					
The applicant was discharged on 11 Nov 12 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The board was conducted on 18 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 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. 

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 an Article 15 and a Letter of Reprimand.  His misconduct included: failure to report to duty (AWOL) and failure to pay a just debt.  

The applicant requests his discharge be upgraded from Under Honorable Conditions (General) to Honorable.  Member states that his separation characterization was inequitable, improper, and unjust, and the determination was done so with error.  The member claims that while he was assigned to Osan Air Base, Korea, his ex-wife, who had Power of Attorney, signed documents committing to a twelve-month lease for an apartment that they could not afford, and the member incurred debt. He states that he was given an Article 15 for reporting one day late to his unit and for failure to pay rent on his apartment from May to June 2012 under Article 134.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request.  The Board determined that there was not enough evidence to substantiate his contentions. It concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force Career.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate.

If the applicant can provide additional information to substantiate his contentions, the board highly 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 24 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)