1------··•v•·-------- 	
i	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

l'.iAi\H. OF SERVICE M EM BER •.LAST, FI RST MIDDLE INITIAL)
I

GRADE	AliSNiSSA N

j_	.	-
1-- "-_(2-N	_l_ ! { SONA L APPEARA_   E ---------+-X__, _R_E'_C_O_R_D_RE_V_r_n-_w	--1

I	CO\JNSEL	"''IE or coL:'iS£L A!\D oR ORGANIZAno:><
1     YI·:	:\"11
x

ADDRESS ANO OR ORG,\MZAflON or Col;NSEL

VOTKOF THE BOARD

I - --- - -------·- ------	- 1 :1BER SITTING

----------

HON
-

GFN

UOTl lC	OTHER

DENY
-

rt
\
!
1-
L_ _ -·-- .. ·-····-------·------··-·-· -.----	 	

+----

j-------t-----1---·---+----
x x x

A93.0 l

INUL\ !'tLlllFR

A67.90

1
2	APPl.ICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCllARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILF
COUNSFL-S RELEASE TO Tl IE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXH!RITS SUBMl'l"l'ED AT TIMF OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

-- ----------- _	_(		,_    	
l!F IJU'C(:  J) \TF	I CASE '>il. lll£H

TAPL' RECORDING or PFRSONAI   APPEARANCE

,_::_>ee 2005	I  FD-2005-00176	I

I (:·: ;: ,\
11

1a(_'
1

,a,::i1;:,:i :,:'.'1.  .NAI. nMipN,\LA,Rk Drscussrn oN THE A rrAcllhP Af:li'.r9!i<;n n1scnARGE 1<Ev1Ew 1io11Rr) L1k:t11sioNAL RATION AU'

! Ad vise appl i c:i nt of t he decision of the Board, the righ t to a personal appearance with/wit hout counsel, and t he right to
( suhm i i an applica t ion to t he AFBCM R .
I
I
! Na rnes and votes wi l l be made ava ilable to t he appl icant at t he appl icant's req uest.
I

1 0:

S.'\1- -1RI\!\
5:'•0 { . STR LFI WLST. SU ITf· 40 i! '. N JlOll'l l .-\ l'!\. TX 7S J50--t7-12

·-·-·- ·	·l»OM•

SECRETARY Of THE AIR FoHc;PERSOri EL COCriCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE KEVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR EE WING. 3RU H.OOR ANDREWS AF8, MD 20762- 7002

·--- ------------·····--·-    --- -	-------	j_  	

---------_J

AFl-IQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will he used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00176	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrad e of d ischarge 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 perti nent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FIN DlNGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds  that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety or inequity that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:  Applicant contends that his discharge has affected his life in a very negative way and that he made a very immature decision unaware of the consequences it would cost. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for, on divers occasions covering a four month period, wrongfully using government computer hardware and software to transmit obscene, sexually explici t, pornographic material. The DRB recognized the applicant was 22 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was in the same age grouping as the vast majority of first-term mem bers who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant depart ure from conduct expected of all military mem bers and that the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. If he can  provide additional documented information to substanti ate an  issue, the  applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board. If he should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of any inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as  well as  any contributions to the community.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the proced ural 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 find i ngs t he 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