AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

TYPE  GEN	X	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	RECORD  REVIEW
·y(l:;OUJ;isli)1#{·::•·  NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

		
X+					
X+					
X+					
X+					
X+					

MEMBER SITTING

ISSUES

A94.06 A93.02

INDEX NUMBER

A67.30

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRJEF 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

29 Sep 2005	FD-2005-00121
\APJ'Ic;;srsS,\lE	.w,!'.llQ'@1SCpE¢ SAol\fA/BJ.!.AcTI()W1Afl.E DISCUSSED (JN THE ATIACHEI)	FOJ.l.G,:PJCHAJl,QE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATION, •
'  ' ',  ,','"c'  , c'    '   , .    ' ·,,·'  ' ,'._     '	'	v	" ,o-._,-_,,_  ·.;, '' .:,  -0	\ ''"  ,! ,)_'	, ,	' .,       '\ \  > ,';/ ::';',;f;,····,   '• v.:  ,\t":    :, ,·•   '{ '   '''	P . '• ' , :;_,'

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

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

+ CHANGE REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AYTHORITY 4

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD 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-2005-00164	

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 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:

Issue I . Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and he was immature. The records indicated the applicant received a  general discharge for a pattern of misconduct and failure in the alcohol abuse treatment. For his misconduct he received the following: an Article 15 for being disrespectful in language to  a noncommissioned officer, underage drinking, and driving while under the influence of alcohol; seven Letters of Reprimand for failure to go and obey a lawful order, drinking and possession of alcoholic  beverages  underage, disrespect to a superior commissioned officer and superior noncommissioned officer, lying, uniform  not  within standards, late returning from breakfast and lunch, improper conduct in the duty area, and a civil arrest for assault; and a Letter of Counseling for dereliction of duty. The DRB opined  that  through  these  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.

Issue 2.  Applicant states that the charges of his civil arrest were dropped and if the incident had been looked into he would still be in the military.  This issue is without merit as the applicant did not provide any documentation to support this issue.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3 applies to the applicant's post-service activities and desires for a government job or a job  in law enforcement. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  However, no inequity or	
impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the
misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

If the applicant can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, he should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board. Ifhe should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.

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