AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
:---------------------------
'L-•••••••••••••••••••••••••••'

G RADE

AMN

AFSN/SSA N
:-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·:
..- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·

TYPE  GEN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE		x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

YES	I	No
x	I

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ADORESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COl/NSEL

MEMBER  SITTING	HON
----------------------------------- ''
'
'

ISSl/F.S

----------------------------------

\ 'O TE	li		!I OTHER		DENY
x x x
x
x

A93.23 A94.05

INDJ!:X Nl/MRF.R

A67.90

ORDER APPOINTING THE 130ARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

3	LETTER OF NOTI FIC:Af'ION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXI llflITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

TA i>E R ECORDING OF PERSONA L APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DA TE	CASE NUMBER

11 Jan 2007	FD-2005-0031 7

c·,·· ·····:••··· r ,..

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

..···········

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an application to the AFBCMR

Names and votes will be made avai lable to the applicant at the appl icant's req uest.

:• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -·,. -------------1
y
'
---------------------------------------------------------------c----------------------------------------- DATE:         l/2412007
FROM,

SAF/MR13R
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RAN DOLPll AFfl. TX 781 50-4742

SF-CRF.TARY OF THE All! t'ORCt: PERSONNEL  COUNCIL All! t'ORCF  DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOAIUJ
1535 COMMANU  llR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS M"», Mil 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-0031 7	

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:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitabl e because it was too harsh. He contends that he was diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) due to his service in Iraq. Instead of receivi ng medical treatment, he was administratively separated.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5's and a Letter of Reprimand for misconduct.  His first Article 15 was for failing to remain awake whi le performing duties.  He was punished with a suspended red uction in grade to Airman, forfeiture of $50.00 pay for two months, and 15 days of extra duty.  His second Article 15 was for striking an individual in the face with his first; disorderly conduct; and communicating to a British Police officer indecent language.  He was reduced in grade to Airman, restricted to Mildenhall for 30 days, and 30 days of extra duty.  The applicant was also administratively disciplined with a Letter of Reprimand for sleeping on post.  The DRB opined that although the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD, it did not impair his ability to know right from wrong or ability to choose the right.  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.

If he can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  I f he 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