AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00651	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 16 June 2017 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General Discharge for Pattern of Misconduct. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant was not represented by counsel.    

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 15 March 2022.  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. 

DISCUSSION:  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, a UIF and member was placed on a Control Roster.  His misconduct included:  repeatedly tardy to place of duty (six times), caught vaping in office (two times), made false official statement, displayed an unprofessional image, and improper use of Government Travel Card.

The applicant stated that his minor disciplinary infractions over the last few years of service should not be enough to prevent him from receiving an Honorable. He explained that the discharge took place over four years ago and it is an injustice to continue to characterize and punish him, especially considering the circumstances surrounding the discharge. He felt that a General does not reflect the overall service and sacrifice he made for this country. The applicant stated that this discharge has an unmistakable stigma which limits his employment opportunities. He concluded that the he has matured greatly since the discharge and he knows that at the time, he did not live up to the values, but he should have been given a chance. He felt that he was not given an opportunity to correct his mistakes and was discharged.

During the personal appearance, the applicant stated that he was granted Probation and Rehabilitation (P&R).  He stated that the P&R was cut short to just a week into it and he was discharged. He was not given a reason why his P&R was cut short.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. The applicant stated that his P&R was cut short. However, the member was never granted P&R. The administrative discharge board recommended that the applicant receive P&R, but the board is not the separation authority and the board’s vote is just a recommendation. The Separation Authority has the final say on whether the applicant could receive P&R, and in this case, the separation authority ultimately denied the applicant Probation and Rehabilitation and determined the member should be separated. 

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 or 3K.

CONCLUSION:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service, service/medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “General”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Pattern of Misconduct, and the reentry code shall remain 2B. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 17 March 2022.  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)