AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, HRS"f MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAM!: OF COUNSEL AND OR 0RGANl7.A TlON

GRADE	AJ.'SN/SSAN

lLT	·	.
X	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x x x

ISSlil::S

A94.53

INDEX NUMBf:R

A80.00

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATJON FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BR1EF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S REI.EASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMl'ITED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING   J)ATt	CASE NU.M.Bl:R

01 Sep 2004

FD-2004-00 154

vr.

. '' .,,.  ' • '· <     ,

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counseT, 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 FORCT. PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW JIOARD 1535 (:0MMA ND DR, l:E WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREW SAFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOA RD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2004-00154	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of 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.
ISSUES: Applicant tendered his resignation in lieu of further administrative discharge proceedings. The applicant's records document clear evidence of conduct totally incompatible with mi litary service. He had two Articles 15, three Letters of Reprimand, and a civilian conviction.  His misconduct included domestic assault, three instances of driving drunk (two on base), making a threatening telephone call to another dependent spouse, driving on a suspended  license, and soliciting a drunken homeless man to drive his car on base. All of these incidents occurred within a 24-month period, the last one within days of his having completed an in-patient alcohol rehabilitation program. It is Air Force policy that personnel who do not respond favorably to rehabilitation be considered for separation. Additionally, the applicant's misconduct was of a very serious nature and members who commit acts of misconduct, even under the influence of alcohol, are held accountable for their actions. Furthermore, the number of incidents of this severity would normally result in a service characterization of under other than honorable,  but  mitigating  factors were taken into consideration at the time of the discharge. Mem ber had served admirably for 13 years before his misconduct began. Circumstances of his divorce, whi le not excusing his conduct, were also extenuating. And finally, member's normal expiration of term of service was approaching and he could not be held beyond that date for the purposes of processing a Board of Inqui ry and securing final administrative action. Thus accepting his resignation allowed his service  to be appropriately characterized. Accordingly, the Secretary of the Air Force's designec, who was aware of the option to approve an honorable discharge, determined that a general discharge (under honorable conditions) was more appropriate due to the seriousness and repetitive, deteriorating nature of member's misconduct. No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

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