AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AMN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
COUNSEL	NAME m·COUNSJ!:L AND OR ORGANlz.\ TJON
YES	NO
x

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS ANJ> OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

HON	GEN
x x x x x

VOTE 011THE B.OARD

uon1c	OTHER

DENY

ISSUES
A93.0l, A93.15, A93.22, A94.05

INDEX NUMl!llll
A49.00	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HF.ARING  DATE
16 JUL 03

CASE NIJl\IBER
FD2003-00233

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITfhl) AT TlME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL Al'PERANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Change the narrative reason for separation to Secretarial Authority. Change in reenlistment code was denied.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MJBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781504742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3IID FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2003-00233	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, and change of reenlistment eligibility (RE) code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: The discharge is upgraded to Honorable. The Reason for discharge is changed to Secretarial Authority. Change of reenlistment code is denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify upgrade of the discharge. However, based on the record, the Board finds that the applicant's character of discharge is inequitable.

Issue. The applicant indicated that during technical school his classmates harassed and beat him because of his race. The applicant failed to press charges for this incident. The DRB could not find anything in the applicant's records to substantiate his claim of discrimination and harassment. However, the Board did find that the applicant had a mental health evaluation in which it was indicated that the applicant was exhibiting signs of anti-social personality and obsessive-compulsive features. A personality disorder diagnosis was not rendered at this time due to the lack of accumulated mental health history on the applicant.

After a thorough and complete consideration of the infonnation submitted by applicant and contained in the records, the Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation to substantiate upgrade of the discharge. Specifically, the Board found the characterization too harsh. However, they did not condone applicant's misconduct.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and that the appHcant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view  of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that  the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and change of reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority, under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment:	
Examiner's Brief