AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00496	
					
The applicant was discharged on 27 August 2013 in accordance with AFI 36-3209 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to General or Honorable.  The Board was conducted on 14 December 2021.  

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 change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C or 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 multiple Letters of Reprimand, and multiple Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included: failure to report on time for active duty; failure to report on time returning from lunch; reported late for sign in and did not properly report at assigned time of duty day; failure to report on time for UTA formation; failure to report for UTA; 4 unexcused absences; stole, xbox, and two controllers and attempted to resell it, convicted of class A misdemeanor for criminal trespass; on two occasions, wrongfully possessed a controlled substance, specifically marijuana; and admitted to use of marijuana. 

The applicant did not contest the discharge based on any inequities or improprieties. The applicant stated that he believed the discharge was not warranted and was not just, based on the current state of the legality of the drug. He continued to say that there was no proof other than a coerced statement he made under extreme duress. The applicant stated that he was not liked by the commander and was singled out multiple times. The member concluded that he suffers from extreme depression, anxiety and PTSD. 

Upon review of the applicant’s service record, the Board was not able to find any documentation regarding the discharge.  The applicant did not provide evidence to indicate improper treatment by his leadership.  Since the board relies on the presumption of regularity, it concluded the discharge received by the applicant was 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. There is no evidence or records the applicant received any mental health treatment in service. Acknowledging that the applicant was an ARC member for the duration of his time in service and his care/treatment may not have occurred in a MTF, the burden is upon the applicant to submit treatment records to his unit and/or to the Board to substantiate his claims and demonstrate the impact of any MH conditions on his ability to serve and/or how the MH condition may have mitigated his misconduct. The discharge was deemed to be appropriate. 

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 16 December 2021.  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 an AFDRB decision can be found at 
https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)