AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AN,  D OR ORGANIZATJON

x

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  m·COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING

x
x
x

INDEX NUMBER
A92.37, A94.11, A94.05	A72.00

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
1---r----=-=---=--===-=------·--
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
J	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE
02-09-17

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0162

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APl'ERANCE HEARING

R
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

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.

SAFIMIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

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

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOA RD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0162	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

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

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety or inequity that would justify an upgrade of the discharge to honorable.

Issues.  Applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge pursuant to his request to be discharged in lieu of trial by court martial for one count of violating a lawful general order by having an intimate personal relationship with an applicant while he was recruiter, wrongfully dating said applicant, wrongfully releasing applicant information to a person outside the Department of Defense,  signing a false official statement given to the county magistrate office for the purpose of deceiving, and making a false official statement to his commander regarding misuse of his government vehicle.  Applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh compared to other military members who committed similar or more serious offenses but were allowed to remain in the military service.  He states he expected to receive only an Article 15 and be sent back to his primary career field, and thought was made
an example of by the referral of court martial charges.  The Board concluded member's misconduct was an extremely significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and included several offenses involving an abuse of his position as a recruiter.  The Board further notes that voluntarily applicant submitted his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court martial and acknowledged in doing so his characterization of service could be deemed under other than honorable conditions.  Furthermore, in accordance with the discharge regulations, airmen discharged under these circumstances usually do have their service characterized as UOTHC.  Therefore the Board found applicant's issues without merit.

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 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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief