AIR :FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW: BOARD HEARING RECORD

•

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
II Ill 111·
TYPE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
toliNSEL	NAME  OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANI7.ATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL YES	No
x

,,,_,,.,

. ; ·..	VQ"l'E OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

""MM"•· ··    "
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
-----------------------------------------	x
x
J
x
x
J
x
-------------------------------------------
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A67.50	EXHIBITS SUBJ\llTIED TO THE BOARD
I	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
. .	TAPE  RECORDING  OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMJIER

15 Jul 2004	FD2003-00050

.   .      ' '	.	.	.     .	..

APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND TIIE BOARD'S DECIS10NAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATIACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVlEW BOARD DECTSJONAL RATI0NAU3
'	'	'	'	'	·'

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 submit an application to the AFBCMR.

..

..	 	

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

.	,,

--- --- -

=.' ·. -1:.<	;.  ,:,> ;, .	...	INDORSEMENT	·..-. \ '
'"'	•:	;. .	'" »,,'	"
,; ;;:';,,,. ,.		
TO:	
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	FROM:	
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FOIKE PERSONNEL COUNClL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002	

DATE:  7/19/2004   .

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2003-00050	

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

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 is denied.

The  Board  finds  that  neither  the  evidence  of  record  nor  that  provided  by  applicant  substantiates  an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

The applicant was discharge with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions  discharge for a pattern of misconduct. The records reflect the applicant received three Article 15s--driving while under the influence, unlawfully striking another airman, and diverse marijuana use. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because he tested negative to drugs.  The records reflect member consulted counsel and accepted non-judicial punishment in lieu of court-martial.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  Applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because he was disciplined but never offered treatment for alcoholism.   The applicant's service medical records reflect member was evaluated for alcohol abuse and entered into Track II on 1 Jun 95 because of an underage drinking incident.   The applicant successfully completed the program on 29 Mar 96.  Member was again referred to the Substance Abuse Office on 2 Aug 96 due to an incident requiring medical care on 16 Jul 96--member slipped and fell in the bathroom and hit his head requiring medical attention and his blood alcohol level was above the legal limit, yet member was still under-aged.  Member was enrolled in Track 3 on 14 Aug.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  The applicant states his discharge is inequitable because another airman in his squadron had the same problems but received a general discharge.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.  The applicant failed to convince the Board on this issue.

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