AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE RECORD REVIEW
- | NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
00
Leonard Calderone
“VOTE OF THE BOARD |” i .
MEMBER SITTING “— GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY
X*+
X*+
xX
X*+
xX
ISSUES A94.06 _ INDEX NUMBER A67.30 ee Le eos
A94,55 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION ___
4| BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL’S RELEASE 10 THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER
13 3 Apr 2010 FD-2009-00124
Case heard in Washington, D.C.
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board 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.
* CHANGE RE CODE
SAF/MRBR. , SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
ne AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPL AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AF#, MD 20762-7001
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous
CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE
FD-2009-00124
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), with counsel, via video
teleconference between Andrews AFB, Maryland and Robins AFB Texas on 13 Apr 2010.
The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:
Exhibit 5: Narrative Reason and RE Code
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.
FINDINGS: The Board grants the requested relief.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an
impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the record and evidence
provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant’s character of discharge and reason and authority for
discharge to be inequitable.
ISSUE: Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable, because it was too harsh. The applicant was
discharged with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge for Misconduct: Commission of a
Serious Offense. This discharge was based on the applicant being charged with drunken or reckless driving
of a vehicle and failure to obey a lawful order and underage drinking. The Discharge Review Board
determined that the applicant’s discharge was too harsh and based on an offense that the applicant was found
not to have committed. While the Discharge Review Board in no way condones underage drinking or
drunken or reckless driving, based on the evidence presented, the Board determined that there were a number
of mitigating factors involved in the incident in question. On 23 Feb 07, the member was charged with
underage drinking and drunken or reckless driving and being drunk on duty, for which he received an Article
15, Unfavorable Information File and 45 days of extra duty. While performing the 45 days of extra duty,
applicant was accused of being drunk on duty which led to a Summary Court Martial. He was acquitted of
all charges during his Summary Court Martial and returned to duty. Member was never returned to his
flight, but instead kept on extra duties for two weeks and told he would be discharged for misconduct on the
prior Article 15. The Board contends that the discharge is based on the conduct, which occurred on 23 Feb
07. AB Lincoln received notification of the discharge on 25 Jul 07, over five months later. The Board
asserts that in order for the discharge process and discipline in general to be effective, the action should have
been initiated promptly and not five months following the misconduct. There was nothing preventing the
initiation of this action back in Mar 07. The board felt that if discharge was warranted for this offense the
applicant should have been provided with notification of discharge several months ago. The Board contends
that the applicant was discharged for his alleged conduct that formed the basis for the 13 Jul 07 Summary
Court Martial, conduct that the Summary Court Officer found that he did not commit. Otherwise, the
discharge action would have been initiated four months prior. The Board felt that the applicant was being
punished for an offense that he was found not to have committed. Also, the Board contends that involuntary
administrative discharge should not be a substitute for disciplinary action.
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 findings and based upon contributory factors presented, the Board believes that-
relief for the characterization of the discharge should be granted and the applicant’s service is more
accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for the discharge is more accurately described
as Secretarial Authority with a Reenlistment Code of 3K under the provision of Title 10, USC 1553.
Attachment:
Examiner’s Brief
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00299
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN AMN TYPE | PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW .| NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY xX x x xX xX 7 — issuES 94,53 INDEXNOMBER 464.00 2 BOIS SUBMEETED A93.01 [1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD |2_|APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00019
The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record. However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant’s characterization for discharge inequitable. The DRB opined that although the two instances of misconduct were due to alcohol related incidents, the second instance of misconduct was over 14 months after the first...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00183
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW :| NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES No xX MEMBER SITTING . 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 Board concluded that the negative aspects of the...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00410
*Narrative reason and Authority +Re Code SAF/MRBR 550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 dm [Qi jm ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE X*+ COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant’s request. | SECRETARY OF THE amered fone AIR FORCE...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00110
*Reason and Authority +Reenlistment Code 5/18/2010 c : SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCY SAF/MRBR ate saree Gy AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR RANDOLPH AIB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2009-00100 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00375
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN eee AB PERSONAL APPEARANCE RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL ee ‘VOTE om HON GEN UOTHC MEMBER SITTING | issues A94.05 INDEX NUMBER A 67.50 re EXHIBELS SUBSE 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 4 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE. a SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2007-00404
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AFSN/SSAN = TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE 4 RECORD REVIEW 4] NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL Bea oe MEMBER SITTING HON GEN uoTHC | OTHER | DENY — xX x x x x 7 =e ISSUES A92.01 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 ee : E t 94.05 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00439
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN SRA TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL YES No X MEMBER SITTING HON GEN uoTHC | OTHER DENY xX xX x x : x ISSUES A94,53 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 A92.35 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A92.03 2 {APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 [LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00031
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW ue NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL OE OTE OF THE BOARD HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY xX x x si ice x x cre - ere ma ‘ TS SUBSITE TO THE BOARE ISSUES A95.00 INDEX NUMBER AG7.10 Se EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE B ARD A01.00 1 [ORDER APPOINTING THEBOARD |2_|APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE __ 3...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00281
FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is 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 cited his desire to receive the G.I.