AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00706	
					
The applicant was discharged on 25 May 16 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge for Misconduct (Serious Offense).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable and a change to the discharge narrative reason.

The applicant was represented by his father.    

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference using VIDYO Cloud Connect on 16 Feb 21.  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 Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C / 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 an Article 15.  His misconduct included:  on diverse occasions, had sexual intercourse with a women not his wife/wrongfully endeavor to influence testimony of another.

The applicant states that the reason he received a UOTHC was they believed he exhibited a pattern when he actually did not. He explains that this created a way to punish him additionally, in light of his civilian conviction, which created a double jeopardy situation. He continues to say that his civilian problem did not affect his unit, career or the military in any way. He states that he was an exceptional Airman and that his EPRs and work ethic reflected that, then and after the incident occurred. The member states that his unit disregarded everything positive about him and his career for his mistake years prior. He states that he has since paid his dues, time and efforts to his community but he still has a dark cloud lingering. The member explains that he was targeted unjustly and made an example of by receiving harsher punishment than others in his unit with similar situations. The member states that he felt he was discriminated against. Harassed and bait and switch tactics utilized to get him out. The member states that he requests we look at his work ethic and military career as a whole when evaluating his case. He continues to say that he has admitted to his wrong doing and would like to be able to utilize the benefits and privileges that comes with signing his name on the line. The member explains that with the new first sergeant, he felt racially profiled and at the mercy of his practices during his earlier ordeal and accusations against him. He states he was harassed, purposely lied to and manipulated into accepting additional and unnecessary disciplinary actions with bait and switch tactics leading the an Article 15. He was accused of adultery and told that if he accepted the article 15, he would receive a General discharge. He states that now he understands that the 3 elements of adultery were never established to prove it existed. The member also claims that due process never occurred and he was never read his rights and that the 1st sergeant used harassment, manipulation, bait and switch and other disciplinary practices to ensure his career was cut short and that he would receive a General Discharge. He concludes that he hopes these documents, attached articles and reports are acceptable as to what he experienced as an African American/Black Airman throughout this ordeal, in regards to racism, disparate and unjust treatment, and bullying by his First Sergeant.

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The board took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, awards and decorations, and other accomplishments.  It found the seriousness of the applicant’s willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of his service. The board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant any changes to the discharge.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be 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.

If the applicant can provide additional information to substantiate his contentions, the board recommends he exercise the right to directly appeal the DRB’s decision to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.   

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 17 Feb 21.  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  

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)