AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
GRADE AFSN/SSAN
CAPT | Aiheee
TYPE
xX
UOTHC PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES NO
MEMBERS SITTING
VOTE OF THE BOARD
HON GEN VOTHC OTHER DENY
aT x
[lr x
ri‘ x
ay x
ay *
ISSUES INDEX NUMBER E _ EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD Se
A01.01, A01.13, A01.39, A67.30 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A01.49, A02.09, A67.03, 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
A92.19, A92.37, A93.23
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
03-01-23 FD2003-0004
COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE. DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD: DECISIONAL RATIONALE.
REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to
submit an application to the AFBCMR.
SECRETARY OF THE AJR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3°? FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2)
Previous edition will be used.
CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2003-0004
NOTE: As an exception to policy, this is a non-personal appearance rehearing based on applicant’s
request to submit additional supporting information which was unavailable at the time of the initial
records review conducted in July 2002. All of the additional documents were received and reviewed
by the Discharge Review Board, as requested by the applicant, in arriving at its findings.
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reason and
sauthority for the discharge.
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, and change of reason and authority for, the discharge are 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.
The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief.
Issues 1, 2 and 6 are similar and will be addressed together. Applicant contends the discharge was improper
because the Air Force failed to follow its own regulations and procedures regarding notification of and
conduct of a Board of Inquiry (BO]), because applicant did not have adequate access to legal counsel or the
evidence against him, because applicant did not properly submit a conditional or unconditional waiver to
his right to a board hearing, and because certain dates referred to on the discharge documents are erroneous.
The record reflects that from about October 1998 to May 2000, applicant engaged in an adulterous
relationship witha a married woman not his wife. He used his government computer e-mail
account extensively to exchange unofficial e-mails with her. After M@@Q@MMiiasked applicant to leave her
alone, he continued to contact her at her place of employment, church, and residence, in person, by phone,
and by e-mail. This led ago obtain a peace order against applicant; when he violated it, @qQ0RaN
filed a Petition for Contempt. On July 11, 2000, applicant’s commander gave him a written “no contact
order’ to refrain from all direct or indirect contact with aggggiaaaa. Meanwhile, AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00657
In the requested waiver the applicant 2 acknowledged his rights to present his case before an administrative discharge board, be represented by military counsel, and submit statements in his own behalf to be considered by the administrative discharge board and the separation authority. The applicant submitted an appeal for upgrade of his discharge and change of the narrative reason for discharge to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB). While the applicant alleges the confession was...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02227
He be reinstated in the Air Force Reserves. On 17 April 2003, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered and approved the applicant’s request to upgrade his UOTHC discharge to an honorable discharge, to change the reason for discharge Pattern of Misconduct, Failure to Meet Financial Obligations, Commission of a Serious Offense, Sexual Deviation to Secretarial Authority, and changed his RE Code to 3K. For those reasons, they do not believe this evidence should be removed from...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050003129C070206
The applicant requests, in effect, that his discharge under other than honorable conditions be upgraded to honorable, his rank be restored to sergeant, that all documents pertaining to his 1987 discharge for misconduct due to civilian conviction be expunged from his records, and "anything the Army sees fit." Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-00305
On 27 November 2001, his commander notified him he was recommending his AGR tour be curtailed and that he be involuntarily discharged from the FLANG for misconduct, with a service characterization of general, under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC). The IG recommended no further investigation into allegations of reprisal. On 27 October 2004, letter of the IG’s findings notified the applicant.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003911
The applicant requests correction of his military records by upgrading his under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge to a fully honorable characterization of service. The applicant through counsel contends that his military records should be corrected by upgrading his UOTHC discharge to a fully honorable characterization of service because he was discharged after being incarcerated on false charges while on leave. The applicant's assertion that his characterization of service...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00412
However, the BOI found he had committed the other offenses and recommended the applicant receive a general discharge from the Air Force. He had seven days time lost due to civilian confinement. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/JA recommends the applicant’s requests be denied.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00010
4) His UOTHC discharge characterization failed to reflect his honorable character in the Air Force, exemplified in his service record and in the recommendations of his superiors. His ex-wifes testimony proved pivotal to the outcome of the proceedings; in which the BOI recommended a UOTHC discharge; and ignored his entire service record and the recommendations of his superiors, and belied his years of honorable service. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01216
On 19 December 2000, the discharge authority’s staff judge advocate recommended approval of the applicant’s request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and that the applicant be discharged with a UOTHC characterization of service. It is also JA’s opinion that the applicant should not be allowed to use his discharge request to halt the court-martial process established by law as the proper means to adjudicate the criminal allegations against him and now, under the guise of an...
USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500419
By unanimous vote, the BOI recommended that that Applicant be separated from the naval service for the reasons listed above and the service be characterized as other than honorable.020211: Applicant’s request denied. After a thorough review of the records, supporting documents, facts, and circumstances unique to this case, the Board found that the discharge was proper and equitable (B and C).The Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because the Board of Inquiry (BOI), which...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077554C070215
On 25 August 2001, the BOI found that the applicant committed an act of personal misconduct by using marijuana and recommended he be separated from the USAR, that he receive an honorable discharge, and, apparently because the applicant was so close to completing 20 qualifying years for a non-Regular retirement (19 years of service as of April 2001), that such separation be suspended for a period of up to one year. On 1 April 2002, the Commander, AR-PERSCOM approved the findings and...