["-	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

41ill llllll ill I. if:		
		
TYPE

YES	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	x
ADDRESS	RECORD REVIEW
D OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL	

F SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

MEMBER SITTING

AFSN/SSAN

x x x x
x

		
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER  OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER
19 Nov 2003	FD-2003-00394		ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	

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	

A69.00

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET	E 40 RANOOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
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

FD2003-00394	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals to upgrade the discharge to honorable.

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 discharge is denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record, or that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. The applicant received a general discharge for failure in the alcohol rehabilitation program. In July 1996, member began an alcohol rehabilitation out-patient treatment program and participated until April 1997. He was diagnosed alcohol dependent due to a pattern of excessive alcohol consumption, suffering from blackouts, and financial and job-related problems. While in the follow-on aftercare program, at some point, member became critical of the program and became unwilling to cooperate. Additionally, member had an Article 15 for making a false official statement to a military police officer, and a vacation of his suspended reduction for two incidents of failure to go. For these reasons his discharge was characterized as general (under honorable conditions) rather than honorable. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and submitted a statement agreeing with the discharge action but criticizing the treatment program and requesting his service be characterized as honorable. The record also disclosed that before entering the military, member had a disorderly conduct conviction for which he paid a fine and restitution. The Board opined that through the unit's rehabilitative actions, member was given ample opportunity to change his behavior. He knew she would be watched closely and any failure to participate in the program would be used as justification for discharge. Applicant now contends his rehab failure was due to a personality conflict, and that the military psychologist misdiagnosed him. He further claims his defense counsel had inadequate time to properly review his case and represent him. The Board could find no evidence in the records to substantiate these contentions and finds them without merit. The Board felt that member's failure to adhere to the requirements of his treatment program was a significant departure from the conduct expected of him, and absent documented evidence from the applicant to the contrary, the Board relied on the presumption of regularity and finds the discharge proper.

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 to	
change the reason or authority for the discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief