AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

ITIAL)

GRADE

TYPE GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

AB
x	RECORD REVIEW

YES	No
x

NAl\IE OF COUNSEL A'.ID OR ORGANIZATION

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A93.23 A93.21

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

l	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

HEARJNG  DATE	CASE NUMBER

06 Apr 2005	FD-2004-00422

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

FROM:

SECRETARY OF TIIE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COIMA".'ID DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDRE\\'$ 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-2004-00422		

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.

ISSUE: Applicant contends <j.ischarge was inequitable because it was based on incidents that occurred as a result of his medical condition that developed while in service. The records indicated the applicant received a Summary Court Martial, an Article 15, a vacation action, five Letters of Reprimand, four Letters of Counseling, and two Records of Individual Counseling for misconduct. The applicant developed insomnia and was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. However, member didn't seek medical assistance for his insomnia until his superior insisted member contact health professionals due to his chronic late arrival at work. Additionally, at the time member first was diagnosed (Jul 03) with insomnia, he denied any existing depression. The DRB acknowledged the member's contention that his discharge was based on incidents that occurred as a result of his medical condition. Although the member's insomnia could have contributed to his failure to arrive at work on time (Jun 03), the Board found that a significant portion of the applicant's multiple other instances of misconduct bore no casual or mitigating relationship with the medical condition, many which also predated onset of applicant's clinical symptoms. In Sep 03, member was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood associated with his court-martial. The DRB opined that through the above administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. 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.

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.

Inview 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