AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

.	.	.	.

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

-...---------------------------- ...

AB	...-----------------...

r-- - - - - - - - - - ----

TYPE  UOTH

----1·- ---PERSONAL APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

COlJNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

-
--'

-:

--

VOTE OF-THE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

-----------------------------------------

ISSUES	A94.53	INDEX  NUMBER	A67.90	E'Xffl f:J; JSUJ}\fiTTED OTHE BOARD ... _.• .·
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
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 HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 May 2007	FD-2006-00459
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECJ:SIONAL RATIONAL AR.E DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW Bq_f!JiCISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in 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

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

..

.....-------../.'":1 ----------------------------   -----------------
.

.	..
..

..

.			. 	

•	. • " ft " • • " ft " " ft " ·- "", " -u " ft " • =- = •   -- --iNDii;Ni""" •••••
TO•	FROM•

" , , ,;o''. · ' . , ,

.
D,AT!S/2912007

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	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

FD-2006-00459	

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the available service record.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article  l 5s, a Letter of Reprimand and a civilian police report for misconduct.  The applicant received his first Article 15 for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and wrongful possession of marijuana.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman, suspended forfeiture of pay, restriction to F.E. Warren AFB for 30 days and 15 days of extra duty.  His second Article 15 was for committing an indecent act with a female by secretly videotaping her while engaged in sexual intercourse and for secretly videotaping another airman while engaged in sexual intercourse.  He was reduced in grade to Airman Basic, restricted to base for 30 days, and 45 days of extra duty.  He had additional misconduct and was administratively disciplined for dereliction of duty and a civilian arrest for disorderly conduct and assault.  The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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