AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD H EARING RECORD
NAM E Of SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDOLE INITIA L)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE	x	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COllNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANI ZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHE BOARD
MEM BER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x
x
ISSUES	A94.05	l. OtX NUMBER	A75.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO TR.E BOARD
l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATlON
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FrLE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDlTIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

flEARINC DATE	CASt NUMBER

02 Jul 2015	FD-2014-00730
APPLICANTS ISSUE AND 11iEBOARD'S DECISIONAL RATION/\LE ARE DISCUSSED ON ll£ATTACfll:D AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in Washi ngton, D.C.

Advise appl icant 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.

(b) (6)

INDORSEMENT	DATE:   7114/20 15
TO:	FROM:
SAf/MRJ3R	S!:CR£TARY OFTH£ Alll FORCE Pl:RSONN'EI.. COUNCii..
AIR FORCE DISCH.ARCE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

ISJS COMM,'\..NI) OR. et WINC. Ji!tO fLOOR

RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS Af8, MD 20762·7001

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00730	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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

FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge and change of  reason and authority for discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant received an Under Other than Honorable Conditions discharge - Requested a Discharge in Lieu of Court Martial (AFI 36-3208, Chapter 4).

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. 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 ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to 10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board. The applicant 's record of service included one request for discharge in Lieu of Court Martial for three charges with specifications of violating a no contact order; dereliction of duty; making a false official statement; wrongfully having sexual intercourse with a married woman not his wife (2x); wrongfully endeavoring to impede an investigation (2x); wrongfully communicated a threat (2x); and unlawful entry of a dwelling.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. The applicant does submit that he has suffered enough from the stigma of having an Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge. In applicant's request for discharge in lieu of court-martial on January 26, 2000, he stated he was aware he may receive an UOTHC service characterization, and was aware of the adverse nature of such a discharge. The Board concluded that the applicant made an informed decision when he requested the Chapter 4 discharge and that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge characterization.

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

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief