Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0170
Original file (FD2002-0170.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
PERSONAL APPEARANCE XxX RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ” 7 | ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL ~
MEMBERS SITTING
xX
- - _ s as : -
X
Xx
xX
Sues ~ | INDEX NUMBER Le DRIES UOMIT RIE TO THe AARD. ¢
A453, A95.09, A92,29 AGT.90 IRDER APPOINTING THF. BOARD
“| APELICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE -
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION — _ ~
HARING DATE ™ CASE NUMBER ” ” 4’ | BRIEF GF PERSONNEL. FILE.
02-10-04 FD2002-0170 COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THT. BOARD -
ADUITIONAL WXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PRRSONAT. APPEAR ANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANGE HEARING

 

 

 

 

    

 

    

ae 3 Oe SHAL a

 

 

REMARKS
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,

 

 

 

SAF/MIHR SECRETARY OG THE AJR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL

 

 

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 AIR FORCE DISCIIARGE REVIEW HOARD
RANDOLPH AFL, TX 78150-4742 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3°" FLOOR
ANDREWS AFR, MI) 20762-7002
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 — : (EF-#f3) “ ~ “Previous edition will be used.

i

4
t
CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | gpo002-0170

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board 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 denicd.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and
after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, He had
six Letters of Reprimand, five letters or records of counseling, an Article 15, vacation of suspended
punishment, and an Unfavorable Information File. His misconduct included numerous failures to go and
being late to work, dress and appearance violations, leaving the scene of GOV accident, and making a false
statement, The records reflect member was also in the Substance Abuse and Reorientation Traming
program, and had been seen by Mental Health on several occasions to deal with his stress and insomnia.
At the time of the discharge, applicant submitted a statement on his own behalf providing explanations for
his misconduct and blaming his tardiness problems on off duty depression and unhappiness, while agreeing
that separation was mutually beneficial to him and the Air Force, but requesting an honorable discharge.
He also submitted five character references. The Board finds that member's mtsconduct was a significant
departure from the standards expected of all airmen, and although given many opportunities to change his
negative behavior, he was unable or unwilling to do so. No inequity or impropriety was found 1 this
discharge in the course of the records review.

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 duc 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
FD2002-0170
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(Former AMN} (HGH Alc)

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec'd a GEN Disch fr USAF 97/08/25 UP AFI36-3208,
para 5.50.2 (Pattern of Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and
Discipline). Appeals for Honorable Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 74/05/02. Enlmt Age: 19 9/12. Disch Age: 23 3/12. Educ: HS DIPL.
AFOT: N/A. A-67, E-94, G-88, M-68. PAFSC: 2A636 - Aircraft Electrician &
Enviromental Systems Apprentice. DAS: 94/11/21.

b. Prior Sv: {1) AFRes 94/02/10 - 94/05/17 (3 Mos 8 Days) (Inactive).
3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Enlisted as AMN 94/05/18 for 4 yrs. Svd: 3 Yrs 3 Mo 8 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AMN - 37/02/13 (Vacation of Article 15, 97/06/16)
Alc - 95/03/18
AMN - 94/05/18

c. Time Lost: None

d. Act 15's: (1) 97/06/16, Vacation, Spangdahlem AB, GE, Article 86.

‘ You, did, on or about 27 May 97, without authority,
fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed
place of duty, to wit; 52™ Medical Group, Dental
Surgery Clinic, building 137. You, did, on or about 2
Jun 97, without authority, fail to go at the time
prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to wit:
building 368, 22d Fighter Squadron. Article 107. You,
did, on or about 27 May 97, with intent to deceive,
Make to TSqt -------++ , an official statement, to wit:
that you were not able té make a dental surgery
appointment due to missing your scheduled flight back
to Europe, which statement was totally false, and was
then known by you te be so false. Reduction to the
grade of AMN. (No appeal) (No mitigation).

(2) 97/02/13, Spangdahlem AB, GE, Article 86. You, did, on
or about 13 Jan 97, without authority, fail to go at
the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to
wit: Chemical Warfare Training Class, building 316.
Suspended reduction to the qrade of AMN, and 14 days
extra duty. (No appeal) (No mitigation).
FD2002-0170

e. Additional: LOR, 08 JUL 97 - Leaving the scene of an accident.
LOR, 12 NOV 96 - Failure to go.
LOR, 29 OCT 96 - Failure to go.
LOR, 29 OCT 96 - Violation of safety regulations.
RIC, 20 SEP 96 - Failure to comply with dress and
appearance standards.
LOR, 20 SEP 96 - Failure to go.
RIC, 22 MAY 96 - Failure to comply with orders.
LOR, 12 FEB 96 - Failure to qo.
LOC, 23 JAN 96 - Failure to go.
RIC, 289 FEB 95 - Failure to go.
RIC, 13 FEB 95 - Failure to go.

EE. CM: None

gq. Record of SV: 94/05/18 - 96/01/17 Spangdahlem AB 5S (Initial)
96/01/18 - 97/01/17 Spangdahiem AB 3 (Annual)

(Discharged from Wright Patterson AFB)
h. Awards & Decs: AFTR, NDSM, AFOQUA, AFOLTR.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (3) Yrs (6) Mos (16) Das
TAMS: (3) Yre (3) Mos (8) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/04/11.
(Change Diacharge to Honorable)

NO ISSUES SUBMITTED.

ATCH
None

02/07/30/cr
f : : FPL 002 ~- 7 O

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
UNITED STATES AIR FORCES IN EU AROFE

 

MEMORANDUM FOR 52 FW/CC AUG i 2 Goa
FROM: 52F WHA

SUBJECT: Legal Review of Administrative Discharge
22d Fighter Squadron

1. Lreviewed the administrative discharge action agains! It is in
substantial compliance with the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and A¥1 36-3208 and otherwise legally

sufficient to support discharge.

2. BASIS FOR ACTION: Administrative discharge action against is based
upon a pattern of misconduct, specifically, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline,
pursuant to AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2, The infractions consist of the following:

a. On 13 Feb 95, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. For this
action he received a letter of counseling dated 13 Feb 95. .

b. On 28 Feb 95, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, For this
action he received a letter of counseling dated 28 Feb 95.

c. On 23 Jan 96, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. l’or this
action he received a letter of counseling dated 23 Jan 96,

d. On 9 Feb 96, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his scheduled appointment. For this
action he received a letter of repnmand dated 12 Feb 96.

c. On or about 22 May 96, he, having received lawful orders to provide his new phone
number and address for the recall roster, to resolve his problems with housing, and to report in to
his duty section at Ieast once a week, failed to obey the same. For these actions he received a
letter of counseling dated 22 May 96.

f. On 18 Sep 96, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his scheduled appointment.. For this
action he received a letter of reprimand dated 20 Sep 96.

g. On 19 Sep 96, he failed to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: AFI 36-2903, by not
complying with Air Force standards of dress and appearance. For this action he received a letter
of counseling dated 20 Sep 96.
Cd ED2002- O17 O

h. On 18 Oct 96, he failed to wear a safety belt while riding in a government vehicle. For this
action he received a letter of reprimand dated 29 Oct 96.

i, On 29 Oct 96, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty. For this
action he received a letter of reprimand dated 29 Oct 96.

j. 0n31 Oct 96, he failed to go at the Lime prescribed to his appointed place of duty. For this
action he received a letter of reprimand dated 12 Nov 96, which was placed in an unfavorable
information fle CUIF) established 6 Dec 96.

k. On 14 Dec 96, he fled the scene of an accident. For this action he received a letter of
repomand dated 8 Ful 97.

1. On or about 13 Jan 97, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his scheduled appointment.
For this action he received an Article 15 dated 18 Feb 97, which was placed in his existing UIF on
18 Feb 97.

m. On or about 27 May 97, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his scheduled

appointment. On or about 2 Jun 97, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place
of duty. On or about 27 May 97, he made a false ollicial statement td

52d Medical Group, Mental Surgery Clinic. For these actions he received a vacation of suspended
nonjudicial punishment dated 23 Jun 97, .

3, MATTERS FOR RESPONDENT:

a. The respondent enlisted in the Air Force on 18 May 94, He has three years and three
months of total active duty service. The respondent has two EPRs, with overall ratings of 3 and 5

from most recent to oldest. ie is 23 years old, and his AQE scores are A-67, E-94, G-88, and
M-68.

b. On 4 Aug 97, after consulting, counsel — Eubmitted statements on his own
behalf. He requests that you characterize his service as honorable (Tab 3).

4. DISCUSSION:

a. On 8 Aug 97 2 FS/CC, recommended thal ve discharged
from the Air Force with a general discharge without P&R.

b. The discharge is being processed under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2, which provides
that an airman may be discharged for a pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and
discipline. Despite numerous opportunitics to modify his behavior, Amn has shown a
(FO2008~ 0170

consistent pattern of irresponsible bchavior, deliberate disregard for authority, and a total lack of
discipline. He has been given ample opportunities and strong puidance to correct his behavior to
comply with Air Force standards of conduct, bui has failed to take advantage of these
opportunities. His conscious decisions to disregard standards required of Air Force members
warrant his immediate discharge.

5. ERRORS AND IRREGULARITIES: There are no errors or uregularities which prejudice the
rights of the respondent.

6. CHARACTERIZATION OF SERVICE: Honorable discharges are only appropriate when an
airman's service generally has met Air Force standards of acceptable conduct and perfermance of .
duty or their service is otherwise exceptionally meritorious. Based upoi

disciplinary record, he does not deserve an honorable discharge. On the other hand, an under
other than honorable conditions (VOTHC) discharge is only given for more serious misconduct,
such as use of force ot violence to inflict badily injury or death, abuse of a special position of
trust, or acts or omissions which endanger the health, safety and welfare of others or the security
of the United States. Tt docs not appear that misconduct nses to that level.
Furthermore, the airman is entitled to an admunistrative discharge board hearing ifa VOTHC
charactenzation is recommended, A general discharge is most appropriate im this case, since
significant negative aspects of his military career outweigh the positive aspects.

7. PROBATION AND REHABILITATION (P&R): Probation and rehabilitation are
appropriate in special and Himited circumstances, primarily when a member has demonstrated a
strong potential for reform. disciplinary record indicates the rehabilitative
measures which have been employed to date have had little or no cffect on his conduct. He has
been given multitudinous opportunities to reverse his pattern of misconduct, but has failed to take
advantage of these opportunilies. There is no reason to believe that, piven one more opportunity,

will conform to minimally acceptable Air Force standards in the future. Five
letters Of counseling, six letters of reprimand, an Article 15, a vacation of suspended nonjudicial
punishment, and the establishment of a ULF demonstrate his continued refusal to adhere to Air
Force standards. Therefore, I do not recommend P&R in this case.

8. ACTIONS WHICH MAY BE TAKEN: As the Special Court-Martial convening authority,
you have the following options:

a. Direct that the respondent be retained in the Air Force.

i

b. Recommend that 3 AF/CC discharge the respondent with an honorable discharge, with or
without P&R.

c. Discharge the respondent with a peneral discharge, with or without P&R.

d. Direct the reissuance of a notification letter for board processing if you think a UOTHC
discharge is appropriate in this case.
FP 2002~ or?

9. RECOMMENDATION: J recommend discharging or a pattern of
misconduct, specifically, conduct prejudicial to good o. __. _._ ___,--, under the provisions of
AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2, with a general dischargc without PER.

Attachment:
Case File
F 22002 - 017 O

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE —
UNITEG STATES AIR FORCES IN EUROPE

 

30 JUL 1997

MEMORANDUM FOR AMB

4

FROM: 22 FS/CC

SUBJECT: Notification Letter

1, FT am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for a pattern of
misconduct, specifically, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, The authority for this
action is AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2. If my recommendation is approved,
your service will be characterized as honorable or peneral. 1 am recommending that your service
be characterized as gencral.

2. My reasons for this action are:

a. On 13 Feb 95, you failed to go at the time prescnbed to your appointed place of duty. For
this action you received a letter of counseling dated 13 Feb 95 (Atch 1).

b. On 28 Feb 95, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty. For
this action you received a letter of counseling dated 28 Feb 95 (Atch 2).

c. On 23 Jan 96, you failed to go at the time prescnbed to your appointed place of duty. For
this action you received a letter of counseling dated 23 Jan 96 (Atch 3).

d. On 9 Feb 96, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your scheduled appointment. For
this action you received a letter of reprimand dated 12 Feb 96 (Atch 4).

e. On or about 22 May 96, you, having received lawful orders to provide your new phone

number and address for the recall roster, to resolve your problems with housing, and to report in
to your duty section at least once a week, failed to obey the same. For these actions you received

a letter of counseling dated 22 May 96 (Atch 5).

f. On 18 Sep 96, you failed to go at the time prescnbed to your scheduled appointment. For
this action you received a letter of reprimand dated 20 Sep 96 (Atch 6).

g. On 19 Sep 96, you failed to obey a lawful general regulation, to wit: AFI 36-2903, by not
complying with Air Force standards of dress and appearance. For this action you received a letter
of counseling dated 20 Sep 96 (Atch 7),
£p2002- O10

h. On 18 Oct 96, you failed to wear a safely belt while riding in a government vehicle. For
this action you received a Ietter of reprimand dated 29 Oct 96 (Atch 8).

i. On 29 Oct 96, you failed to go at the time prescnbed to your appointed place of duty. For
this action you received a letter of repnmand dated 29 Oct 96 (Atch 9).

j. On 31 Oct 96, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty. For
this action you received a letter of reprimand dated 12 Nov 96 (Atch 10), which was placed in an
unfavorable information file (ULF) established 6 Dec 96 (Atch 11).

k, On 14 Dec 96, you fled the scene of an accident. For this action you received a letter of
reprimand dated 8 Ful 97 {Atch 12).

L On or about 13 Jan 97, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your scheduled
appointment. For this action you received an Article 15 dated 18 Feb 97 (Atch 13), which was

placed in your existing UIF on 18 Feb 97.

m, On or about 27 May 97, you Jailed to go at the time prescnbed to your scheduled
appointment. On or about 2 Jun 97, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed
place of duty, On or about 27 May 97, you made a false official statement

«452d Medical Group, Dental Surgery Clinic. For these actions you reccived a vacation
or suspenacd nonjudicial punishment dated 23 Jun 97 (Atch 14).

3, Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in support of this
recommendation are attached. The commander exercising SPCM jurisdiction or a higher
authority will decide whether you will be discharged or retained im the Air Force and, if you are
discharged, how your service will be charactcrized. If you are discharged, you will be ineligible
for reenlistment in the Air Force.

4, You have the nght to consult counsel. Military legal counsel has been obtained to assist you.
T have made an appointment for you to consult Area Defense Counsel,
Bldg 151, Spangdahlem AB, Germany, on_31 July 97 at 1500 hours. You may consult civilian
counsel at your own expense.

5. You have the right to submit statements in your own behalf. Any statements you want the

separation authority to consider must reach me within three duty days, unless you request in
writing and receive an extension for good cause shown. I will send them to the separation

authority.

6. If you fail to consult counsel or to submil statements in your own behalf, your failure will
constitute a waiver of your nght to do so.

7, You have been scheduled for a medical examination. You must report to the 52d Medical
Group Physical Exams Element at 0800 hours on 31 Jul 97 and the Family Practice Clinic at 1045
hours on 31 Jul 97,
fOROO2- 70

8. Any personal information you furnish in rebuttal is covered by the Privacy Act Statement of |
1974. A copy of AFI 36-3208 1s available for your use in your orderly room.

9. Execute the enclosed acknowledgment and return it to me immediately.

Attachments:

AF Form 174, 13 Feb 95
AF Form 174, 28 Feb 95
LOC, 23 Jan 96

LOR, 12 Feb 96 .
LOC, 22 May 96

LOR, 20 Sep 96

AF Form 174, 20 Sep 96
LOR, 29 Oct 96

9. LOR, 29 Oct 96

10. LOR, 12 Nov 96

11. AF Form 1058, 6 Dec 96
12. LOR, 8 Jul 97

13. AF Form 3070, 18 Feb 97
14. AF Forin 366, 23 Jun 97

Sn aAw Rw Ne

Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00220

    Original file (FD2003-00220.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD03-0220 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. He also had six Letters of Reprimand and five Record of Individual Counseling for unsatisfactory performance, disrespectful attitude, missed appointments, late for duty, failure to use a seatbelt, failed room inspection, and dereliction of duty. In view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable...

  • AF | DRB | CY2004 | FD2003-00508

    Original file (FD2003-00508.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AMN) (HGH A1C) 1. (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: On 9 Sep 97 I was discharged from...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00066

    Original file (FD2003-00066.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AESN/SSAN i AB | RAMANA. CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD03-0066 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. d. On 31 Oct 95, 27 Nov 95, 18 Dec 95, 11 Jan 96, and 12 Jan 96, you, without authority, failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty.

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00473

    Original file (FD2005-00473.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge. A1C-(EPR Indicates): 16 Mar 93-15 Nov 94. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: a. Reenlisted as SrA 8 May 96 for 4 yrs.

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0541

    Original file (FD2002-0541.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE =| ¢p9992-0541 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any. At that time, the Noncommissioned Officer in Charge of member’s duty section noted that including verbal counselings, member had had 14 separate opportunities...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0222

    Original file (FD2002-0222.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0222 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0222 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD —y (Former AMN) (HGH SRA) as 1. The Respondent departed the local area failing to obtain a leave number and notify the squadron leadership of her whereabouts, failed to go to her appointed place of duty on four occasions, and...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0237

    Original file (FD2002-0237.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The respondent consulted military defense counsel but has not submitted a statement in response to this discharge action. 16 Feb 95, counseling; 16 Mar 95, counseling; 2 Jun 95, counseling; 21 Oct 95,...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00053

    Original file (FD2003-00053.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    mere AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN SRA | ee PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW ] NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL NONE MEMBERS SITTING ea ISSUES INDEX NUMBER f iS ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A93.11, A94.05, A94.53 447.00 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE 03-05-28 CASE NUMBER FD2003-00053 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0534

    Original file (FD2002-0534.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE GENERAL; The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0534 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD anna: (Former AMN) (HGH A1C) ‘een, i z 1. On or about 4 Nov 95, you were incapacitatied for the proper performance of your duties as a result of prior overindulgence in alcohol, as evidenced by an Article 15, dated 4 Dec 95, (atch 2); c,...

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00252

    Original file (FD2006-00252.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    3RD FLOOR ANI)HF.WS AFB, ~ ~ ' 2 0 1 6 2 - 7 1 t O 2 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will be used AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NllMBER FD-ZU06-00252 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge. ...