AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OJ<' SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE I NITIAL)	GRADE

TYPE UOTH   X	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	RECORD  REVIEW

1WSN/SSAN

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING	HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x
x

ISSUES

A92.21 A92.0l

INDEX NUMBER

A70.00

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

A93.21

2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
AD   IT!  NAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Oct 2006	FD-2006-00059

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, 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.

:."."'"'	.....: :,:··..:	r

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

.,ltATE: 1012612006

SECRETARY OF TllE AIR FORCIC PERSONNEL  COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD 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-2006-00059	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (ORB), with counsel, at Andrews AFB on 26 Oct 2006.

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:

Issue 1.  The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because of his past and present medical conditions.  The applicant had a history of mental health issues prior to deserting, but had previously been found to be fit for duty.  Although the applicant claimed his thinking was disordered by his experiences during his year in Vietnam, the ORB was not persuaded that he was not responsible for his actions or had the inability to know right from wrong at the time he deserted, when he made an anti-V ietnam war broadcast from Moscow, or when he fled from pre-trial confinement.  Whi le the ORB was sympathetic to his cancer related problems and wishes him well in his struggle, the ORB noted that he was receiving treatment from  the Veteran's Administration for his health issues and that his discharge was not due to health issues but due to his past misconduct.  At the time of his discharge he was pending court-martial charges, so he was ineligible to receive a medical discharge.

Issue 2.  The applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service.  The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, decorations and other accomplishments.  The DRB found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 3.  The applicant requested upgrade of his discharge based upon his post-service activities.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant is active in his church and community and worki ng with
underprivi leged youth and has a good job.  However, no inequity or impropriety in hi s discharge was found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the miscond uct of the applicant is appropriatel y characterized on his DD 214.

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