AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2022-00380 	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 29 April 2010 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General Discharge for Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure. The applicant appealed for a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 4 January 2023. 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 an Article 15, a Letter of Reprimand, and multiple Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included:  sending text messages on his phone in the hallway of the mental health clinic; also observed playing scrabble on his phone during duty hours and arguing with someone on the phone while sitting at the front desk; without authority, absented himself from duty from on or about 8 May to on or about 10 May; was repeatedly told to stop texting while performing duties; behavior at work was disrespectful and offensive; was sarcastic and profane while in the office; Failed to show for duty in proper uniform; argued with a SNCO in front of new Airman, that he couldn’t leave the duty section; left training session before being released and took new Airman with him; was told to report to discuss his absence from the duty section. He reported but left after a few minutes and did not return; observed sitting at desk with cell phone in his hands and was asked if he was texting and he denied it; was previously issued an LOC for excessive phone use; failed to obey an order to take his bicycle and uniform home; instructed to make a follow up dental appointment but deliberately ignored this order and left the clinic; on divers occasions, failed to complete required training.

The applicant requested an upgrade so that he may enter the Navy as an officer. He contended that he was lied to by his command, as they told him he could get out early, could reenlist, and keep his benefits. The applicant also stated that he did finish ADAPT and feels the one DUI shouldn’t prevent him from serving his country. He highlighted that he has now matured, started a family, and finished his bachelor’s degree. The applicant concluded that everyone makes mistakes, and he just wants a chance to serve again, as he knows he would be a good sailor and leader. 

During the personal appearance, the applicant initially wished to highlight his post service conduct and accomplishments as evidence for clemency, however, once he was briefed on the authority of the Discharge Review Board, he understood that this was not grounds for an upgrade. The applicant indicated that it wasn’t until recently that he realized he was not able to enlist due to his reentry code. He felt that not being able to reenlist for a DUI was unfair. 

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 Board understood that the applicant felt the discharge was harsh for a DUI. However, the Board determined, through evidence in the record, that although he was discharged for ADAPT failure, the applicant also committed several acts of misconduct, which violated the terms of his Probation and Rehabilitation, ultimately leading to the discharge. Additionally, the Board noted that through the applicant’s previous DRB application, the applicant was diagnosed with impulse control disorder during service. This disorder is an unsuiting condition and the maladaptive behaviors he exhibited may explain the misconduct, but they do not mitigate, excuse, or outweigh his discharge. There is no evidence this maladaptive behavior has ceased, which would prohibit the applicant from reentering the military. The discharge received by the applicant was deemed appropriate.    

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 and equitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “General”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure”, and the reentry code shall remain “2B”. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 6 January 2023.  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)