AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
I N  A ME  OF  SERVICE  MEMBER   (LAST,  FIRST  MIDDLE   INITIAL)	GRADE	I   A F"-N/"-."-A N	I
..

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x

SRA
I

--  -··
RECORD Ri.'.VIEW

;Kt: ; oji  t:L ·	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No

. ;, 4:f'.·F't ..	VoTE OFTHE BOAIID

.x.

-

-

-

f--

f--

,.
.u.·,·-.	• ·. ·. ,_ ,/ ,; '," '..-<'\'. r;:;- :> ;·,:;,;:·'f?'i)tr- d ->1<'f''''' ',:	><	..
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x

X *

x
X* X*

ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER	:;-/ ,, l¥ 'li -mrn!fs·s1JBl\f	." <?tl·1'l<lhlWl:\)l.11

A92.21	A69.00	,.  ·}'
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 TIM E OF PERSON AL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

06 Dec 2005	FD-2005-00182

.

.·./\PPLICf.NT'.SISSl.JE'AND.THE BOARD'S DECISIONAi. RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED.AIR FOR.CE DISCHARGE RE:\'lEW BOARD DECISIJlNAL.MTIONALE ·•
i" "	,',·;;;_    ,	, '·· ,.: 'y·t  :.    "
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

* Send signal

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.

A	..	I'	(?	/ }
SIGI'{ATl'R}: OF RECORDER	f l  /  Y'\	I	I )	_SIGNATURE GF BOARD P"WENT	1.	,

·;.. ,_.

1	:0::·y:,!itJ< ;

.. ... .
..-•'  ·: ;

·'  '.

'.'-'

-,--

N "'
',    ,,

. .. ..· ·	; ·;:-;··..• •.  •

·.-_,...  /i>f}f"'  •JW(< ;'.·:fp	:.f!/OOS W: F· , :1)ds·» ·/ ;::r.; : .· ·' st:-;tJ!'

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL  COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB, TX 78150-4742	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-2005-00182	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are 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: The applicant stated that he would like to reenter the military. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for alcohol rehabilitation failure. The applicant was unwilling to cooperate, continued to drink, discontinued use of Antabuse, failed to attend Alcoholic Anonymous meetings, and was unwilling to be continued in the rehabilitation program.   The DRB opined that 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.

The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well post service and has a good job. However, the applicant failed to address his alcohol abuse issue. No inequity or impropriety in his discharge was found in the course of the DRB hearing.

Ifhe can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant 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 post-service accomplishments documenting successful completion of substance abuse treatment.

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