AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

·

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAi.)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

GRADE

x

RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAME OF COU NSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGA?>llZATIOl'i' OF COl1'S1';L

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

--- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - - ----- - - - ,	-------------j-----+----r----r------;	1
x x x
x
------------------------------------------

ISSI.JES	A92.21

I INDEX Nt:MBER	A67.90

1 ' ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
1
. 2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 	
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

	CASE NUMBER

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel. DD Form 149 submitted. The case will be forwarded to the AFBCMR for further processing.

·------- - - ------ ------- - ------ - - -l_ _ _/l_ _d__.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,,,,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,
!.	'--	1
''
i

SAF/l\l!RBR	/
550 C STREET WE T	ITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, T  78150-4742

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR "FORCE PERSON:"!EL COllNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD
!53 CO:\IMAND DR. EE Wl1".G.3RD FLOOR
A"SDRI:"-'S AFB, MD 2G76l-7ll0l
.	j
Previous edition \Vill be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NU!\.IBER

FD-2004-00300	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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 nor  that provided  by  the applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUES:

Issue 1.  Applicant was discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, one for underage drinking and failure to obey a lawful written order not to drink while underage, and the other for an indecent act committed against a female civilian off base.  A civilian police department report of investigation disclosed that member admitted to the police officer he had forced himself onto the girl, and it "probably was the wrong thing to do."  He told the officer this because he didn 't want the officer to think he (applicant) was a "scum-bag."  Additionally, during an Air Force Office of Special Investigations interview, member admitted under oath and rights advisement to committing the alleged indecent act, although member claimed the civilian female was a willing participant. She however claimed that member threatened harm to her and her son if she told anyone about the incident.
Additionally, the record regarding the underage drinking incident disclosed member had also been accused of assaulting a female airman during that incident, but the specification was removed from the Article 15 after member presented his version of events and denied the assault happened as alleged.  The Board concluded member's serious misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the characterization of the discharge was appropriate.

Issue 2 applies to the applicant's post-service activities.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  However, this is not a basis of inequity or impropriety on which to justify an upgrade of his discharge, and none was suggested or found in the course of the record review.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

Issue 3. Applicant claims be has twice previously requested his discharge be upgraded, without response. The Air Force Review Boards Office has no record of a previous application requesting an upgrade to his discharge.

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