.JI ---....---- ···"-

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AMN
X	RECORD  REVIEW

YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING
:-------------------------------------- :
'
'

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A93.23 A92. 15 A92.21 A94.07

INDEX NUMBER

A67.00

1	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 NUMBER

13 May 2004	FD-2003-00519

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.

- --- --- ----- --- --- ----- --- --- ----- --- --- --- ------------

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH 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

FD-2003-00519	

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  the  applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues 2, 3, 6, 7, and 9.  Applicant was discharged for misconduct.  The records indicate the applicant
recei ved an Article 15 and a vacation of suspended punishment.  The offenses documented therein included violating the phase program by visiting the dorm room of a member of the opposite sex between the hours of 0200 and 0600, and wrongfully wearing an earring on a military installation in violation of a general instrnction.  Additionally, information found in the medical records disclosed the following:  before 2 April 2001 , member had two Letters of Reprimand (LOR) for unauthorized visits to his girlfriend's room and bay, he had two LORs for wearing an earring on the base and for smoking in uniform, and he had yet a fifth LOR for verbally provoking and assaulting another airman.  These documents further reflected member's "remarkable tendency to allow his personal life to affect his work performance."  Subsequently in June 2001 , member was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotions and conduct after making a suicidal gesture and being admitted for in-patient care; he threatened to jump off a hotel balcony where his girlfriend was staying with another friend, and stated he did it to get attention.  Earlier that day he had violated the no contact order regarding his girlfriend, with who his command noted he'd had many altercations.  Five days earlier that same week, applicant had threatened to kill his girlfriend and another service member.  During that time period he had pulled a knife and had to be restrained by a fellow service member. Unfortunately, member's discharge processing files were unavailable to the Board for review due
to being missing from the record.  Because member's discharge file was unavailable to the Board for review, the Board was unable to conclusively ascertain if there was yet more misconduct on member's part that formed additional bases for the discharge.  The Board also could not conclusively determine if at the time of the discharge member consulted counsel, submitted statements on his own behalf, or requested he be discharged in lieu of court martial.  Applicant notes he was in pre-trial confinement at the Marine Corps Brig at Quantico, VA, and he accepted the under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge rather than wait for a court martial.  The record confirms he had lost time from 14 June 2001 to 20 August 2001; he was discharged from in-patient psychiatric care on 12 June 2001, and was discharged from the Air Force on 22
August 2001.  The record also reflects that member was charged with disobeying a lawful command, and	
with obstructing justice.   Unfortunately, the Board is not able to substantiate any inequity or impropriety in the discharge actions, and lacking documented evidence from the applicant to the contrary, the Board relies on the presumption of regularity and finds the discharge proper and without basis for an upgrade.  The Board concluded applicant's misconduct documented in the Articles  15 and medical records alone was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate on that basis.  No inequity or impropriety could be found in this discharge  in the course of the records review.	

.._ ....

Issues 1 and 3. While these contentions may be true, they do not provide a basis in mitigation or extenuation to warrant an upgrade. The seriousness of member's willful misconduct significantly outweighs any positive aspects of his period of service.

Issues 4 and 5. These issues could not be substantiated in the record or applicant's submission to the Board. Thus the Board found them without merit and insufficient to justify considering an upgrade.

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