PERSONAL APPEARANCE	X RECORD REVIEW

NAME 011 COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

MEMBERS SITTING

ESS AND OR ORGA.JlllZA TION 011 COUNSEL

x x x x x

ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER

A94.05, A92.37. AOl.13

HEARING DATE
02-10-01

A73.00

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0168

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW
J	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMlTTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

KS
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.

SAF/Ml
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCii, 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 BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0I68	

GEN ERAL:  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 availabl e 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 applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

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 dereliction of duty, false swearing, and carnal knowledge.  Member had a previous Letter of Reprimand for an unprofessional relationship with a dependent female under the age of 18, and an Article 15 for failing to refrain from having unescorted
female minors in his dormitory room.  Member had been well forewarned the restrictions against having such relationships with young dependent females, yet persisted, resulting in the court martial charges.  The Board concluded member's misconduct was an extremel y significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and member was well aware of the Air Force's policy in this area.  The Board further notes that applicant voluntarily submitted his request for discharge in lieu of trial by court martial, thus not
attempting to establish his innocence, and in doing so acknowledged his characterization of service could be deemed under other than honorable conditions; in accordance with discharge regulations, airmen discharged under these circumstances usuall y do have their service characterized as UOTHC.  The Board found no wrongful action by the Air Force, and finds the discharge proper and without basis for upgrad e.

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