AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
-.ITIAL)

TYPE  GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
1$?/®Jl\!Ml::;: .... NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

ME.MBER SITTING

ISSUES	A94.05	--- . .10

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

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

12 Oct 2005

FD-2005-00173

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 THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WlNG, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 10761-7001

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

receive his last out-process dental examination.  This issue is also without merit as member's DD Form 214 , block 17 reflects member did not complete his dental examination/treatment within 90 days of separation, combined with the fact member had served 180 days made him eligible for certain VA benefits.   Member needs to contact his local VA to determine specifically which benefits he's entitled.

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00173	
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:

Issues 1, 2, 3, and 6.  Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because he consumed cough medication which made him drowsy and declares he was not intoxicated.  The records indicated the  applicant received two Article 15s for wrongfully consuming alcohol or malt beverages within 8 hours before duty and found sleeping while posted as a sentinel; and for sleeping on duty while a member of the Alarm Response Team in a parked vehicle.  Member's argument about his flight chief's statement is without merit as member consented to a blood alcohol test which resulted in a finding of .02%.  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 4.  The member contends his discharge is improper because his first Article 15 (which happened two years prior) should not have been a consideration for discharge and appears to be double jeopardy.   This issue is without merit.  A commander considers the entire enlistment period when determining discharge.

Issue 5.  Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because there was a belief he suffered from sleep apnea and his studies were never finished.  This issue is also without merit.  Member's medical records · reflect a ruling of no evidence of obstructive sleep apnea/central apnea found during testing.

Issue 7.  Applicant contends his discharge is inequitable because he was stripped of all benefits and did not