550 C STREET WEST, SIJI'I'E 40 
RANDOLPIl AFB. 'I'X  78 150-4742 

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 
AIR POHCE UISCHAKGE KEVILW  BOAHU 
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR 
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-2005-00213 

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

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counsel,  at 
Andrews AFB on 28 February 2006. 

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: 

Exhibit #5 :  AF Form  102  IG Complaint Registration 
Exhibit #6:  IG Response dated 5 April 2004 
Exhibit #7:  Legal Assistance Letters 
Exhibit #8:  Telephone Log dated 23 September 2004 
Exhibit #9:  Response to LOR 
Exhibit #lo:  AETC Form 736 and Response 
Exhibit #11:  Memo from I 
Exhibit #12:  Two E-mails 
Exhibit #13:  Excerpts from the Applicants submission to the AFBCMR 
Exhibit #14:  Miscellaneous Items 
Exhibit #15:  E-mail from 82d Wing IG to AETC IG 

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

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge and change of reenlistment 
code 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. 

ISSUES: 

Issue  1.  Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based upon his chain of 
command's erroneous belief the applicant was a homosexual.  Despite this assertion, there is no evidence his 
discharge was based upon his supposed sexual orientation.  Ilis discharge was based upon his failure in his 
technical training program and his minor disciplinary infractions.  The records indicated the applicant was 
medically eliminated from one technical training school, reclassified into the postal apprentice career field 
and then failed out of the technical training school for that career field. 

Issue 2.  Applicant contends that his discharge was improper because he was not allowed to consult with an 
Area Defense Counsel after receiving Letters of Counseling or Letters of Reprimand.  Even if this were true, 
it does not create an impropriety in the discharge action.  There is no right to consult with counsel associated 
with receipt of LOCs or LORs.  The applicant did consult with counsel regarding his administrative 
discharge from the Air Force. 

Issue 3. Applicant contends that upgrading his discharge would remove blockages and allow him to avoid 
awkward questions when he attempts to secure a better job.  While the DRB was sympathetic to his desire to 
obtain more rewarding employment, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was found in the course of 
the hearing, 

Issue  4.  The  applicant  contends  that  the  discharge  action  was  improper  because  he  should  have  been 
discharged  by  Sheppard AFB rather than Keesler AFB.  This contention is without merie the 82d Training 
Group Commander was the appropriate separation authority because the applicant was a student assigned to 
one of the 82d Training Group's  training detachments. 

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 

DEPARTMENT OF THE A I R   FORCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 

ANDREWS  AFB,  MD 

(Former A1C)  (HGH A1C) 

MISSING DOCUMENTS 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd a UNCHARACTERIZED Disch fr Shaw AFB, SC on 4 
Oct 02 UP AFI 36-3208, para 5.22  (Unsatisfactory Entry Level Performance or 
Conduct).  Appeals for Honorable Discharge, and Change in the RE Code, Reason and 
Authority for Discharge. 

a. DOB: 7 Feb 77.  Enlmt Age: 24 6/12.  Disch Age: 25 7/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 

AFQT: N/A,  A-26,  E-55,  G-34,  M-36. PAFSC: 9T000 -  Trainee.  DAS: Unknown. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 13 Aug 01 -  25 Mar 02  (07 mos 13 das) (Inactive). 

3 .   SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Enlisted as A1C 26 Mar 02 for 6 years. Svd: 00 Yrs 06 Mo 10 Das, all 

AMS . 

b.  Grade Status:  None 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15's:  Unknown. 

e.  Additional: LTR, 11 SEP 02 -  Eliminated from Postal Operations 

LOR, 10 SEP 02 -  Failure to shave and failure to maintain 

LOC, 29 AUG 02 -  Dormitory room not in inspection order. 
LOC, 27 AUG 02 -  Random dormitory inspection, found your 

Apprentice Course. 

military bearing. 

desk drawer unsecured, 

EXAMINERS NOTE:  The additional information was taken from 
the discharge notification letter.  Also applicant enlisted 
with guaranteed AFSC 3E031. 

f .   CM:  Unknown. 

g.  Record of SV: None, 

h.  Awards &  Decs:  BMTR, NDSM. 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS:  (01) Yrs  (01) Mos  ( 2 3 )   Das 
TAMS:  (00) Yrs  (06) Mos  (10) Das 

4 .   BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 20 May 05 

(Change to Honorable Discharge, and RE  Code, Reason and Authority  for 

Discharge) 

ISSUES ATTACHED TO  BRIEF. 

ATCH 
1.  Applicant's Issues. 

. . .  . . ..  . . 

-- 

APPLICATION FOR THE REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 

FROM THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES 

(Hease mad insinrctions on Pages 3 and 4 BEHIRE mmpieting this application.) 

k r n  Approved 
OMB NO. 07- 
Expires Aug 31,2006 

bud.n fer this cdloc6m of infmm- 

fh. public &ng 
i r & N C h U .   SealChing exisifng data WltDT, 
30 h per re-, 
 Smd mmmmts FF this~hrdm dmst. or 8W olhar aSPCt Of  this cdkclion 
g.rhsring a d  maintaining the data  needed, and campleikg and miswing th. cdlastion of i n f d .
. ~ d m o S h t d d b a -
M h ~ , ~ ~ 6 u p g e s t i m . f o r ~ ~ b u d e n . ( o t h o ~ c p i v t m a m ~ ~ , ~ S a r v i c a s d C o m m u * = a n  
that rmtwiitsmn&rtQ any elha pmvision at taw.  no p- 
if  ii doss mi  dspky a ~urremly valid OMB 
a n t 4  Mmbu.  PWSE DO  NOT RENRN YOUR  FORM TO fM ABOVE  ORGANIZATlON.  ETURN COMPLETED FORM TO THE APPROPRIATE ADDRESS ON 
BACK OF THLS PAGE 

shall be &]an  in any  pmnHy fm failing to 

hdudng d w  Ume fw mvi- 

k s s i h n e d  to .-go 

~ ( 0 7 ~ )

with  -on 

of Inf- 

 

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT 

AUTHOIUTK  10 U.S.C.  1553;  E.O.  9397. 
PRINCIPAL WRWSE(S)r  To apply for a change in the charactetization or reason for rnilinary discharge issued to an in&~dual. 
ROUTINE USEtS):  None. 
MSCLOSURE:  Voluntary;  however, failure to provide identifying information may impede processing of this application.  The request for 
Social Security Number is strictly to assure proper identification of the individual and appropriate records. 
7.  APWCANF  DATA  [The mmon whose dimhame is fu be 6srwiewAd)-  PEASE PWNT OR TYPE INFORMATION. 
9.  BRANCH OF SERVICE  IX one)  I 
b.  NAME rtasfg /%st, MiMk Initial) 

I MARINE  CORPS 

I COAST  GUARD 

I AIR  MACE 

I ARMY  I 

NAVY 

c GRADElRANK AT MSCHARGE 
L,  4 
I Z -   J 

SEWWr*r NUMBER 
d SO- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - -  
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  

2.  DATE OFDISCHARGE OR  SEPARATION  4.  DISCHARGE CHARACTWRATlON RECENED (X ond  5.  BOARD ACTlOlll REQUESTED lX d 

L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .  

IYYYVMMDD) (If date is mom than 15 yeam 
ago, submil  a IU3 Farm  7 4 9 )  

,AO&% / o  0 q 
3. UNIT AND LOCATION AT DISCHARGE 

OR SEPARATION 

HONOI7ABl.E CONDmONS 

GEN- 
UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABlE CONDITIONS 
BAD CONWCT ISpew'al cuu~-nwrrial onhd 

.&--  HONORAEILE 

x  UNCHARAMUU- 

OTHER f&phinl 

CHANGE TO HONORABLE 
cmwizmix~mmmm 
HONORABLE CONDITIONS 
CHANGE TO^^ 
f N o
r A k ~ /

t ~ f

o

. . 

 

3 ' 3 ~  T R S   %I5+ TRN 
6.  ISSUES:  WHY AM  UPGRADE OR CHANGE IS REQUESTED AND JUSTmCATlON FOR M E  REWEST {&muwe  PI Item 14.  See insfcucz~ans on , 

. . 

AND THIS FORM IS SUBMITIED TO ADD ADDITIONAL ISSUES, JUSTIFICATION.  OR  EVIDENCE. 

8.  IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION. M E  FOLLOWING AlTACHED DOCUMENTS ARE SUBMITIED AS EVIDENCE: f C o d m  m Item 17. 

.  - -   . , 

" - w -  

I 

9.  TYPE OF R M E W  REQUESTED IX one) 

% 

CONDUCT A RECORD REVlW  OF MY DISCHARGE BASEI) ON M Y  MILITARY PERSONNEL FILE AND ANY ADDmONAL DOCUMENTATION 
SuBMmED BY WE.  I ANDMR fed-atwe) WKL NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE BOARD. 
I ANWOR I ~ ~ u m e V i ~ M a r r n )  
WASHlNG70N. D.C.  M€lROPOtTTAN  A- 
I ANDIOR / ~ ~ ~ m e U ~ s e n t B t i v e )  
lent*  city and state) 

WISH  TO APPEAR AT A HWIUNG  AT NO WENS  TO THE  GOVE~~~~MPCT 

WISH TO APPEAR AT A HEARlNG AT NO UIPrmSE TO THE GOVERNMENT BEFORE A TRAVEUNG PANEL CLOSEST TO 

BEFORE THE BOARD IN WE 

Inirkdl A m  ADDRESS 

INOTE:  T k  Navy Di~harge Revkw Baard d e s  not have a travdng m.) 
- 

- --#U#UqLe-+- 

- - - - - - - - - - 

%I_ 

10.a.  CWhJSEUl?EPRESENTATIVE Wanyl NAME [Last, F d ,  MM& 

. (See Item 10 of the ~nStfUcti0n~ about counset/representarive.l 

~1 

C

lbL+t  ~ C a i t n s  
V Q ~ ~ L G ~  
1 7 X Z  C*e  5L.  yu 
L u a S \ n c w , ~ , ~  D C  a o  Y  a / - / / / /  
11.  APWCA~T MUST SIGN IN liOH 13.a.  BELOW. If the record in question is that of a deceased or incompetent person. LEGAL FROOF OF 

-d.  FAX  NUMBER Il&hde  Area Code) 

 ~ a v ; s ~ ~  

~ c m r ~  

-

DEATH OR  INCOAllPfTMCY MUST ACCOMPANY THE APPUCATION.  tf the application is signed  by other than the applicant. indicate 
the name  - 

and relanionship by marking a box below. 

- 

- 

u 

---. 

SPOUSE 

WlDOW 

W I W W R  

NEXT OF KIN 

12.8- CURRENT MARING  ADDRESS OF APP~ICANT  OR PERSON ABOVE 

I a - ~ - o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ l ~ W - ~ a ~ C ~ ! d e ! ~  
4 

- - - - - - - - - - - 

~~~~~~~~~~~ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _  . _ _ _ - -  
13.  CERTInCATION. 

.  - - _ - - - - _ - - - - - _ - - - - - _ _ I  

I make the foregoing statements, as part of my claim. with MI knowledge of the 
involved for wilEfully making a false statement or daim. (U.S.  Code,  Title 18, Sedans 287 

pen- 
and  1001, provide that an individual shall be fined under this rifle or impnpnsoned nat more than 5 years, 
or both. 1 

a.  SlGlYANRE -REClUlf&D  fApM&  or puzwn in hem  r 1 abouel 
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  

b DATE SIGNED - REQUIRED 

IYYYYMMDDI 

6 s  aa 

DD -FO ifi- - 293:  IVIAR  -ibbK 

PRMOUS EDlTlONS ARE OBSOLETE. 

CASE NUMBER 
ID0 not write in this -.I 

I 
I 

I 

Page 1 of 4 Pages 

14. CONTINUATION OF ITEM 6, ISSUES Ilf 'app/iwb/e) 
+ 

r e = ~ ~ a ~  

W A Y   5  b - 5   ~ ~ m ~ v * ~ - & r

J r e l ~ ~ , . f l y  ar  

8.2002  10:34AM  5;'. 
I 

9ENATOR TOM  CARPER 

or carper 

, 

I 

F.b &?.@&s'- 003 1 3  

+  ~uvm 

NO.  291 

P.  1". 

DEPARTMENT OF T W  AIR FORCE 
U R E M I e s r I # N A l S O I R A I # I N G ~  

FROM;  DET 1,336 TRS/CC 

1.  ~ . a m ~ y a n t d i s c l h e r g e ~ ~ ~ n i ~ e d s ~ a t e s ~ i r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -  
1 ~ 1 p u h r m c e w ~  
CbptmS, ~ o n D , p i * l p a p b 5 . ~ . I f m y ~ 0 4 i s ~ l e d , y a u r d i ~ w i U b s  
descdbada0~entry-kveI~6s~andyou 

Tba.rlcfawi@;fiortbis*isAlFPD4S32sndAm3&3208, 

vfiiI beimrigriiixceenktmmt mthe Air Force, 

*r ~ n o r a h n t l ~  

mme, 
e
~ ~ w w a c a d e m i G ~ e s ~ t h t h e ~ , ' ( A t c h 1 , & ~ A w ~ a t c h s )  

~ep02;~ou-- 

c

. 

. .  mokd qrsatm~ ~

 

8 
P 
-, 

b.  On 40 SQ  02, you vi6W Am 362903, by fkEng to have prisr to leaving She dornibv 

kr-youfailcdtb 

bb=k-& 
~ ~ a w f i e s r t h e ~ w a o ~ i n t f O E ~ ~ d d e d t h e ~ ~ d ~ f  
irXCerrtioq,and&lisg;tasalukthacarxmrander.  I F a
-&tcd 

r r # a a b y o u r ~ ~ ~ ~ s n a r e a b  

I O S e p Q 2   ( A t c h l , ~ B w / ~ )  

u

~

~

r

~

a

~

y

o

o

f

r 

C.  On 29 Aug 02, y6u did tlot have your &tory 

ropm in inspection order* fox which you 

~ u e d a ~ o f C o t m & g , ~ 2 9 A u g 0 2  

~ k h r , A p p ~ l i ~ C )  

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 
AIR EDUCATION AND 'TRAMIN0 COMMAND 

MEMORANDUM FOR 8 1  TRG/CC 

FROM:  81  TRWIJAJ 

500 Fisher Street Rm 227 
Keesler Am, MS 39534-2553 

SUBJECT:  1-egal Revicw, Adminjstrativc Discharge - A.BL-- - -  - -  - - - - - - - - -  - -  - -  ,, 
I 

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

1.  ACTION:  On 23 Sep 02,  Det 1.336 TRS/CC recommended that AB L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  j 
(hereafter referred to as "Respondent") be administratively separated for unsatisfactory entry level 
performance or conduct with an entry level separation. The authority for this recammendation is 
AFI 36-3208, Section D, paragraph 5.22 (unsatisfactory entry level pcrforrnanee or conduct).  Under 
paragraph 6.2.2, thc respondent is not entitled to a board hearing. 

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

2.  PERSONAL DATA: 

a.  Daee and T m  of Enlistment:  26 Mar 02; 6 Years; 

b.  Total Active Federal Military Swvice Date:  26 Mar 02; 

c.  Performance Reports:  nfa. 

3.  EVIDENCE FOR THE GOVERNIWNT: 

a.  On or about 18 Scp 02, the Respondent was ~liminated from the Postal Operations Apprcnttce 

course, due to his acadcmic deficiencies with the course. 

b 

b.  On 10 Sep 02, the Respondent violated AFI 36-2908, by failing to shave prior to leaving the 
dormitory for breakfast.  In, addition, hc failcd to maintain his milimy bearing by calling an area to 
attention when the commander was alrcady in the room, moving around while at the position of 
altention, and failing to salute the commandm. For these infractions, the Respondent reccivcd a 
Letter of Reprimand, dated 10 Sep 02. 

c.  On 29 Aug 02, the Respondent did not have his dormitory room in inspection ordcr, for which he 

received a Letter o f  Counseling, dated 29 At~g 02. 

T h ~ s  1%  a priv~legcd documcnr.  Do not rcleasc  in whole or in pan without thc cxprcss pcrrnisfiion of the Staff Judge Advocate 

AITORNFIY WORK PRODUCT 

c.  On 27 Aug 02, during a random dormitory room inspection by the Cl~ief, Military Training Leader, 
the Respondent's desk drawer was found unxcured, for which hc received a Letter of Counseling, 
dated 27 Aug 02. 

4. EVIDENCE FOR THE RESPONDENT: This 25-year old airman is in his first enlistment and 
has AQE xcru as follows: A  - -%&-36, 
7
cowsel and submitted written matters for the commander's consideration. 

C. - 14: M - 7

L - - - - - - - - - -  

4  DISCUSSION: In his response, .#3:----------' 
j states that the reaaon he joined the Air Force was 
because it was a calling.  He requested that the administrative actions bc stopped because whm he 
was notified of punitive offenses, he stopped the bchavior that he was counseled or reprimanded on. 
He also states that Ite was not given the opportunity to see or speak with Arcs Defense Counsel in 
his previous incidents.  He saw a Defense Attorncy at Shaw AFB who represented soldiers ar Ft. 
Jackson, but was told that he could not be of any assistance bccausc hc did not know about Air 
Force regulations.  Hc also stated tl~at Airman Basics do not look down upon him, nor docs hc set a 
negative cxamplc for thcm.  FiB; - - - - - - - - - - -  j stated that he had expressed the performance difficulties 
at the Postal School to the proper channels, and  at times felt as though ttc was not getting anywhere. 
He q u e s t e d  that he be givm the opportunity to go to another tech school in administration, and 
take advantage of the 81" Wing Learning Ccntcr to imprave his academic skills, graduate, and cater 
the operational Air Force. This file is legally sufficient.  The Respondent was medically eliminated 
from his first technical lraining school and was academically eliminated fiom the Postal Operations 
Apprentict coursc.  The Respondent has had vm'ou ineactians far which he has been counseled 
and reprimandad.  We concur with Dct  1.336 TRS/CC's recornmcndation of an entry-levcl 
separation. 

8 - - - - - - - - - - - 

6. OPTIONS: As the Separation Authority your options are: 

a.  If you determine this separation action is not supportcd by the evidence, dircct thal it be 

discontinued, and direct the respondent be retained in thc Air Force. 

b.  If you determjnt this separation action has been brought under an inappropriate section of 

MI  36-3208, direct reinitiation under a more appropriate section. 

c. Jf  you determine this separation action is supported by thc evidence, approve the 

separation action, without probation and rehabilitation, and dircct the tespondent bc given an entry 
level separation unsatisfactory entry level perfomancc or conduct under the provisions of AF136- 
3208, Scction D, paragraph 5.22. 

This IS o privilcgcd document.  Do not releasc in whole or in pnrt without thc express permission of rhc StxfTJudgc Advocate. 

ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT 

7.  ,WCOMMENDATION: Approve rcspondenh separation, without probation and 
rel~abilitatim, with an entry level servics characte~ization for unsatisfactory mtry-level performance 
of conduct under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Chapter 5, Section D, paragraph 5.22. 

: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - u - r - - - '  

NCOIC, Airman Discharge Facility 

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - ? - - -   x - - - - - r - - - - - -  

Chief, hmidstrative Discharge Branch 

Attachment 
Case Filc 

Th~s is s privilcgd documcnt. Do not release in wholc or  in part without rhe express permission of the StnfFJudgc Advocate 

A 7 M R N S Y  WORK PRODUCT