-

-

A I R FORCE DISCHA RG E REV I EW BOAR D H EA RI NG R ECOR D

NAME OF SERVICE  MEMBER (LAST, FIRST l\llDl>LE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
•	l!RB.ll'n

PERSONA L APPEA RA NCE

R ECORD REV IEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COll NSF:L AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  Of  CO\INSl:I.
n:s	NO
x

- - -

von:Of THE llOARI)
M EMBERS SITTI NG	HON	GEN	llOTHC	OTllF;R	llENY

'

''	X*
'

h	'   	
''	X*
'
.	'	---
'	
'

'

X*
1-o	' 	
''	X*
''
h	'

   	

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

''	X*
·

ISSl'ES	iNPE:'\ Nl'MBER	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOii.RP
A94.06	A69.00	1	ORDER APPOINTING Tl IE UOARD	--
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW 01' DISCHARUF
3	LETTER Or NOTIFICATION	--
tt t:ARING PATE	CASE NllMBER	4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
24 APR 03	FD2002-0452	COUNSEL'S  RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SURMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

--

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL Al'l'ERANCE HEARING
APPLIC ANrs ISSUE. AND nm BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE OISCUSSEO·ONTHE. ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE 11.EVlEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

R[ IARKS
Case heard at And rews A FB, M D
* Cha nge reason and authority and reenlist ment code Ad vise appl icant of t he decision of t he Boa rd.  ·

 	-

.SJ9c\]     RJcQ[ .n <!	- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I_ .SJG!!Jll!l.J:_QE!!lli!l.P_r..ll.ESJPWJ' _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'
''
'' '

!

!'_  _  _  _ _			---------      --------------------------------------------------------------------

INIJORSEMENT

TOo	FROM:

I	DATE:  24 APR 02

SAl'/MIBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40	AIR ['ORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD
RANIXJLPH AFl3. TX 78150-4742		1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING. JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AF13. MD 20762-7002
A FHQ FOR M 0-2077, JA N 00	( E F-V2)	Previous ed ition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATION ALE	CASE  Nl'MBER

FD2002-0452	
GENERAL:  The appl icant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change of reason for discharge and change ofreenl istment eligibi l ity code.

The appl icant appeared and test ified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Andrews A FB, M D on April 24, 2003.  Mr....appl icant's father testified on the appl icant's behalf.

The fol lowing add itional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exh ibit 6: Character reference letter
Exhibit 7; College transcri pt Exh ibit 8: Letter to Senator

FINDlNGS: The d ischarge is upgraded to Honora ble, the reason for d ischarge is changed to Secretarial Au thority and change of the reen l istment code is approved.

The Board finds t hat evidence of record and that provided by the appl icant substantiates an injustice that justifies upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUES:  The appl icant's issues are l isted in the attached brief.  The applicant contends that his discharge was ineq uitable because he was not afforded probation and rehabi litation and was singled out due to initial m inor
infractions.  He feels that evidence of his potential for rehabilitation was ignored.

The record ind icates the applicant received four Letters of Counsel ing and two Letters of Repri mand for being late for duty, not shaving, leaving his dorm room un locked, having an unregistered vehicle, and involvement in a fight while
drink ing determined to be in self defense. For the latter alcohol related incident the appl icant was referred for alcohol rehabi l itation. The appl icant was determ ined to have failed the alcohol rehabil itation program and was discharged on that basis.  After a thorough review of the record and l isten ing to testimony during this hearing, the Board noted that
t he applicant's in itial minor miscond uct occurred over a period of two weeks shortly after arrivi ng at his first duty station and was corrected by the applicant without recurrence.  Evidence of the record shows that duty performance followi ng h is initial m istakes was excellent as documented by awards and very strong letters of recommendation from sen ior non-comm issioned officers who directly supervised him.  The Board noted with concern the alcohol program  fai l ure letter but noted a lack of confi rmatory documentation in the med ical and person nel records, and contrad ictory ev idence from d i rect supervisors who provided character references.  The applicant provided evidence regard ing his post service conduct that suppm1ed his claim of suitabil ity for probation and rehabilitation.  The board concluded that the basis for discharge was proper and within the commander's discretion, and that the applicant was afforded proper  d ue process du ri ng h is discharge proceeding.  However the DRB concluded that the appl icant's d ischarge was too harsh, and that probation and rehabi l itat ion wou ld have been an appropriate option in th is case.

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the proced ural and substantive req u irements of the discharge regu lation and was with i n the discretion of the
d ischarge authority and that the appl icant was provided fu ll adm inistrati ve due process.  However evidence of the record and testi mony finds the discharge ineq uitable and service deserving of characterization as honorable.

I n view of the foregoing find ings the Board fmther concludes that there exists an equitable basis for u pgrade of d ischarge, th us the appl icant's discharge should be changed to Honorable, the reason to Secretarial Authority, and the reenl istment code changed to J K.

Attachment Examiner's Brief