AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00508	
					
The applicant was discharged on 19 April 2012 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to General or Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The Board was conducted on 14 December 2021.  

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 14 December 2021.  No witnesses were present to testify on the applicant’s behalf. 

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 General or Honorable, 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 a Charge sheet.  His misconduct included: Wrongfully used GTC for personal use; on divers occasions, violated a lawful general regulation by wrongfully attempting to develop a personal relationship with a recruit (x2); by wrongfully attempting to develop a personal relationship with an applicant; by developing a sexual relationship with a recruit; by attempting to develop a sexual relationship with an applicant; and by unlawfully holding an applicant close to his body with his arms while attempting to kiss her. 

The applicant requested and upgrade to his discharge characterization so that he may join the Air National Guard. The member stated that he had only one disciplinary issue which was due to a lapse in judgment. He explained that he built an unprofessional friendship over several weeks with one of his recruits, and having been recently separated from his wife of over 15 years, he simply sought companionship. He stated that the friendship never went beyond spending time together in public places. 

In the personal appearance hearing, the applicant stated that he was regretful and sorry for his misconduct. He stated that he felt that the UOTHC discharge was unfair and at the time he accepted the Chapter 4 option he was unaware that UOTHC was the discharge characterization he would receive.  The applicant requested an upgrade to his discharge characterization so he could serve in the military again despite his previous misconduct. 

After a thorough review of the service records, the Board found that the applicant signed a memorandum acknowledging the possibility of receiving a UOTHC discharge and the negative implications associated with that characterization.  The board reviewed the conditions surrounding the applicants discharge and found no basis of improper or inequitable actions on behalf of the applicant’s leadership.  Although the applicant has made positive professional strides since his military service, the DRB does not have the authority to apply clemency in the review of UOTHC discharges.  Therefore the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct during his service outweighed the positive aspects of his military service. The Board deemed that the characterization of 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.

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 15 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)