i pet — cy ae nc oe

 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

 

 

 

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE | AFSN/SSAN
EP: SSGT

TYPE ne —e mat is IE peti: —

GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF CORNSEL AND GR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     

 

 

HON GEN [ HOTHC OTHER DENY

MEMBERS SITTING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ISSUES Tomer INDEX NUMBER ee fe. THIMTESUDMITIED EER ROARD
A94.39, A94,53. ADL43 A72,00 j | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
3 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION ~
HEARING DATE CASE NUMERR "4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE —_
o209-17 FD200240075 COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITONAL KXHIBITS SUBMITIEN AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE REGURDING OF PERSONAL AFFEKANCE HEARING

 

 

 

 

  
 

iE RD hag ES :

    

  

 

 

 

RESLARKS

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
subinit an application to the AFECMR,

 

SIGNATURE OF RE,

 

 

 

 

FROM:
SAF/MIRR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL. COUNCIL
550 © STREET WEST, SUITE 40 AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
RANDOLPH AFR, FX 78150-4742 1835 COMMAND DR, EE WENG. 3°" FLOOR

 

 

ANDREWS AFB, MID 20762-7002
AFHO FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 ee BEV) —_ Previous edition will be used.
CASI NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE =| pp3n92.9975

GENERAL: 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 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 cquity or propriety of the discharge, and
after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.

Issues. Applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge pursuant to his
request to be discharged in lieu of tnal by court martial, apparently for drug abuse. Although the discharge
records are missing, there is indication member was convicted by special court martial for drug abuse, but
did not receive a punitive discharge. Furthermore, there are entries in member's medical records indicating
he was entered into drub rehabilitation and counseling following a positive urinalysis for cannabis use. It
appears this particular use was that which resulted in the court martial charges that member requested
discharge in lieu of. The Board concluded member’s misconduct was an extremely significant departure
from conduct expected of all military members, and as an NCO at the time, member would have been well
aware of the Air Force’s zero tolerance policy for drug abuse. 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 usually do have their service characterized as UOTHC. Additionally, since the
discharge documents are not available for review, and lacking any evidence from the applicant to the
contrary, the Board must rely on the presumption of regularity and found no wrongful action by the Air
Force, and finds the discharge proper and without basis for upgrade.

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 ihe 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 Bricf
FD2002-0075
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFR, MD

within (Former SSGT) (HGH SSGT)
1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec'd a UOTHC Disch fr USAF &7/11/30 UP AFR 39-10,
Chapter 4 (Discharge in Lieu of Court-Martial). Appeals for Honorable Digch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 60/01/11. Enlmt Age: 18 2/12. Disch Age: 27 10/12. Educ: HS DIPL
‘ AFOT: N/A. A-20, H-30, G-27, M-54. PAFSC: 43173 - Airlift Aireraft
Maintenance Technician. DAS: 81/12/31.

b, Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 78/03/28 - 78/07/27 (4 Mos 0 Days) (Inactive).
(2) Enlisted as AB 78/07/28 for 4 yrs. Reenlisted as SRA
81/11/02 for 4 yrs. Svd: 6 yrs 10 mos 8 days, all AMS. AMN - 79/01/28. AIC -
79/07/28. SRA - 84/04/01. SGT ~- 82/04/01, SSGT - 33/10/01: APRs:
9,9,9,9,9,9,9,
3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Reenld as SSGT 95/06/06 for 4 yrs. Svd: 2 ¥rea 5 Mo 25 Das, all AMS.
b. Grade Status: SseT - 83/10/01
, SGT - 62/04/01
SRA += 81/04/01
AlC - 79/07/28
AMN - 79/01/28
c. Time Lost: None.
“ds. Art 15's: None.
e, Additional: None.

f. CM: None

g. Reeord of SV: 84/10/22 - 85/10/21 Andrews AFB 4 (Annual)
85/10/22 - 86/10/21 Andrews AFB 9 (Annual)

(Discharged from Andrews AFB)

h. Awards & Decs: AFCM, AFOUA, AFGCM W/2 OLCs, AFLSA W/1 OCLC, NCOPMEGR,
AFTR.

i, Stmt of Sv: TMS: (9) Yrs (8) Mos (3) Das
TAMS: (9) Yre (4) Mos (3) Das
=p

 

4, BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:

Appin (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/02/05.

{Change Discharge to Honorable}

NO ISSUES SUBMITTED.

ATCH
None

FD2002-0075

02/07/30/er
* ATR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW ROARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

tne ee ome:

 

 

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) — GRADE, AVSN/SSAN
Wn AMN | Sanat
EE St -. .
PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW

 

 

 

‘"] NAME OF COCNSEI, AND OK ORGANIZATION ABDBEAS AND GR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HON GEN OTH OTHER DENY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

me) me] et]:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paar

: FOELE SUBS
ORDER APPOINTING THE HOARD

me
1
| 2 ATIPLIC ATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCIIARGE
3
4

 

SSUES — INDEX SUMBER
A416 A7TO,(H

 

 

 

 

LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

 

 

 

HEARING DATE ~— CASE NUMBER | (BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
3 OCT 02 FD2002-0182 COUNSHI-S RFI EASE TO THE BOARD

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

 

 

    

QING OF PERSONAL APPRRANCE TE
CHARGE HE VIEW BOARD DECISRONAL RATIONALE.

ho

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

REMARKS

Case heard at Washington, D.C,

Advise applican( of the decision of the Board.

SIGNATURE OF BOARD FRESIDENT

 

SIGNATURE OF RE

    

   

 

 

 

      

 

 

 

 

 

SAF/MIBR SECRETARY (FF THE ATR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCITI,
450 C STREET WEST, SUITY: 40 AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW ABOARD
RANDOLPH AFB, TM 78150-4742 1534 COMMAND DR, EE WING, FF PLOW
ANDREWS ARB, MDD 20762-7002 .
AFHO FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will be used.
CASK NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE. | rp 2092-0182

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

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 to General is approved.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an
impropriety that would justify upgrade of the discharge. However, after a thorough review of the record, the
Board finds that the applicant’s character of discharge is inequitable.

ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with an Under Other Than Elonorable Conditions (UOTHIC)
Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, Member received an Article 15 for wrongfully using a
government computer to transmit an electronic mail message containing pornography. The record ts
missing documents, however, it does indicate that the applicant was charged with 6 days lost time when she
went home without filing a leave request. While the Board did not condone the applicant’s incidents of
misconduct, they did feel it would have been more equitable to give her a General 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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board also concludes that the overall quality of applicant’s
service is more accurately reflected by a Giencral discharge. ‘The apphcant’s characterization for discharge
should be changed te General under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
FD2002-0182
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

amgeniinn. (Former AMN) (HGH AMN) MISSING DOCUMENTS
err
1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a VOTHC Disch fr USAF 00/04/21 UP AFI 26-

3208, para 4.3 (Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial). Appeals for
General Diach,

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 79/03/12. Enlmt Age: 19 1/12. Disch Age: 21°1/12. Educ: HS DIPL,
AFQT: N/A. A-76, E-33, G-33, M-32. PAFSC: 3M031 - Services. DAS: 99/01/21.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 98/04/03 - 98/05/19 (1 Mo 17 Days) (Inactive).
3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Enld as AB 98/05/20 for 4 yrs. Svd: 1 ¥r 11 Mo 2 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AMN - 99/09/29
AB - 99/03/29 (Article 15, 99/03/29)
AMN -° 98/11/20

c. Time Lost: 6 Daya.

d. Art 15’s: (1) 99/03/29, Mountain Home AFB, ID, Article 92. You, did,
oh or about 18 Mar 1999, fail to obey a lawful general
requlation to wit: paragraph 6.1.3, Air Force
Instruction 33-129, dated 1 Jan 1997, by wrongfully
using a government-owned computer to transmit an
electronic mail message containing pornography.
Reduction to the grade of AB, 30 days extra duty, and a
reprimand. Appeal denied. (Ne mitigation).

e. Additional: Unknown.
E. CM: None.
g. Record of SV: None.
(Diacharged from Mountain Home AFB)
h, Awards & Pecs: AFTR.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (2) Yrs (0) Mos (19) Das
TAMS: (1) Yr (11) Mos (2) Das
FD2002-0182

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293} dtd 02/03/19.
(Change Discharge to General)

Issue: On December 24, 1399 1 eine asked permission from my
supervisor Sgt ---+-- , if IT could leave the area. In return he said "yea I

don't sée why not you have séven days off just leave a number where you can be
reached. So I Got a flight and left. Onee at home I phone the Base everything
was fine, I then went into (?) labor and had my son three months early. My Sgt

+ aee was the first to phone ------ Army Community Hospital at Ft Stewart GA
about (?) weeks went by and I was contacted by my First Sergant (sie) ~--- and
told that my commander May ---- was bringing me up on charges of being AWOL when

I had permission from my supervisor along with other Airman.

ATCH
None,

o2/08/oa/er