AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REV IEW BOAR D H EA RING RECORD

..

NAME  OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, FIRST  M lllllLF: I NITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

'------------------------·.	AB

--- --- --- --- ---
'	'

-----------------------:	:----------------'·
TYPE    GEN	I	PE RSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	Al>l>H.1<:ss AND ()I{ 01u;ANl:t.ATH>N OJ< C011NSEL
Yl<'.S	I	No
I x

r--->

----.

VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

···-···   - ·	.. ·-··	·-  ·-·-··	--·--·----
!ION	OEN	lJOTHC	OTllER	DENY

------------------------------	x
x x x
x

------------------------------
ISSIJES	A93.23	INDEX NIJMBF.R	A67.IO	EXH IBITS  SUBM ITTED  TO  THE  BOARD
A93.19	1	ORlWR APPOI NTI NU Tl I I ' 130A R D
A93.09	2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COlJ NSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONA L APPEA RA NCE

TAPE RECOROI NO OF Pf:RSONAL A PPEARA NCE HE

HEARING DATF.	CASE NUMBER

30 Jan 2007	FD-2006-00244
Al'l'LICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard in Washington, O,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 AFBCM R

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

....-- --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- ---- --- --- --- --- ----- --- j
''

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Jt_ _ :- - - - - - - - - - - -.   	  	
''

'	'

'''

bl

-   ---r ·---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

''' '

I N DORSF.M F.NT	DATE:    2/15/2007

I    FU.OM:

SAF/MRUR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

SECRETARY OF TllF, AIR FOii.CE Pf'.KSONNf:L COllNCll.
AIR fORCF, D!SCHAR(;F, RVIF,W HOARIJ
1535 COMMANI> HK1 Et; WIN(;,JKI> Fl.()()K

RANOOLPll A FB, TX 781 50-4742	ANlll<l:ws Arn, MIJ 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBEU

FD-2006-00244	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) but decl i ned to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FIN DI NGS:  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.

ISSUES:

Applicant contends discharge is inequitable because it was based on several incidents of shortcom ings due to alcoholism, depression, and family emergencies.  He stated that he had no support from his organization.
The records indicated that the applicant received two Article 15's, a Letter of Reprimand, and a Letter of Counseling for misconduct.  The first Article 15 was for failure to go to his appointed place of duty and overindulgence of intoxicating liquor causing the applicant to be incapacitated for the performance of duties. He was punished with a suspended reduction in grade to Airman Basic and 21 days of extra duty.  The second Article 15 was for failing to refrain from using the government telephone personal identification number to make unauthorized personal telephone calls.  He was reduced in grade to Airman Basic.  He had additional misconduct and was administrativel y discipl ined for failure to compl ete mandatory training,  failure to obey a lawful order, and failure i n the weight management program.  I n review of the record, the board did not find any evidence showing that the un it knew about the difficulties the appl icant was battling until after first Article 15. The applicant admitted that he had family issues and struggled with alcohol and agreed to be institutionalized at Estes Park Harmon y Foundation for 28 days.  Unfortunately, the applicant's med ical records were not available for review by the board.  Lacking any documentation to prove otherwise, the Board relies on the presumption of regularity and finds the discharge was proper.  The Board concluded that the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

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