AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE
A rnn

AFSN/SSAN

1-- ,.-   ---1
YES	No
x

NAME OF COlJNSFL AND UR URGANIZA TIUN

RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSFI,

-· ·-·····---·-·-·-   - - ,

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

. -     - --+-- ------<- ---!
X*+

@	X*

X*+

X*+

ISSUES

A93.01

INDEX  NllMBER

A67.90

l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

X* I

3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4   flRmr or PERSONNEL FI LE COUNSEL'S R.ELEASE TO THE BOARD

-·•--·-'v"·""'"''----··--·--

ADDITIONAL EXJllBITS Sl Jl3MITTrn AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE I !EARING
f - ------------+-- -------------------+---+-  ------- -··    ,	_                                                                         HCAl!ING    IJATE	CASF: Nll MAFR
1 6 A pr 2010	FJ>-2009-00182

Case heard in Washington, D.C. and Robins AFB, Georgia via video-teleconference.

Ad vise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right lo submit an appl ication to the A FBCMR. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's request.
*Reenlistment Code
+Narrative Reason
@Secretari al Authority

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RAN DOLPH AFB, TX 78 I .'i0-4742

Fl!OM:

SECRF:TARY  OF THE AIR  FORCE  rt:l!SONNEI.  COUNCIL AIR FORCE LHSCHARGf, REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND IJR, EE WING, JR!J FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762·7\Kll

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00182	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference between Andrews AFB Maryland and Robins AFB, Georgia on 16 Apr 2010.
The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:

Exhibit #5:  Applicant's  Contentions
Exhibit #6:  Response to N otification of Discharge

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

FINDING: The Board denies the u pgrade of the discharge, the change of reason  and  authority  for discharge, and change of reenlistment code.

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

ISSUE:

Issue I :  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for a mistake he made when he was "young and dumb."  The applicant was discharged IAW AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2:  A Pattern of Misconduct, Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline.  The applicant received an Article 15 for failure to go, a Letter of Reprimand for failing to stop at a stop sign and driving on a suspended driver's license, and a second Article 15 for wrongful ly transmi1ting pornograph ic material on a government computer.  The DRB recognized the appl icant was 21 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he did not know ri ght from wrong.  The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast m<jority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

Issue 2: The applicant stated that he did not know that the reenlistment code he received would prevent his reenl istment and had he known, he would have submitted a response to his discharge. The records show that the applicant met with a defense counsel, acknowledged that he was being discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, with an under honorable  conditions  (general)  discharge.  The  applicant's defense counsel, Capt A, signed a memorandum stating that the applicant was fully counseled and advised of his rights prior to waiving his right to submit a statement in response to the discharge. The DRB noted that the applicant had submitted an  application for review to the DRB in March 2003, requesting  a "record review" of his discharge based on his military personnel file.  He did not submit any issues at that time.

CONCLlJSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the proced ural and substanti ve requi rements of the discharge regul ation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief