AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

~ Y P E  GEN 

YES 

No 

I x 
I 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

I 

RECORD REVlhW 

I 

I 

MEMBER SITTING 

I 

1 

- 

---  - 
INDEX NU.MBER 

A80.00 

ISSUES  A94.06 
A92.22 
A93.20 

HEARING DATE 

01 Dec 2005 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-2005-00204 

Case heard at Washington, D.C. 

1  1  I  ORDER APPOMTMGTHE BOARD 
1  2  1  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 

BRlEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

(  TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

I 

1 

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance withlwithout 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. 

SAFIMRBR 
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78 150-4742 

SECRETARY O P T H E  AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING. 3RD FI.OOR 
ANDREWS AFB, MD 10761-7001 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will be used 

FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

AIR 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-2005-00204 

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge  Review Board  ( D m ) ,  without counsel, at Andrews AFB  on 08 Sep 
2005. 

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade  of discharge to  Honorable is  approved.  The request for change of reason and  authority are  denied.  A 
reenlistment code change does not apply in officer discharge cases. 

The  Board  finds  that  neither  the  evidence  of  record  nor  that  provided  by  the  applicant which  substantiates an  inequity or 
impropriety that would justify  a change of discharge.  However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the 
Board  fmds the  applicant's  misconduct, committed during  a  relatively limited  period  of time  in  his  Air  Force  career, was  an 
aberration when considering his entire military service and post-military career. 

ISSUE:  The  applicant contends that  his  discharge was  inequitable  because  it  was  too  harsh  and  did  not  take  into  account 
additional factual evidence that may have resulted in a different decision than rendered by the discharge authority.  The applicant 
also  contends that  the  decisional  rationale  offered  in  his  previous  non-personal  appearance DFU3  "ignored  the  evidence  of 
depression as a source of  [his] aberrant behavior,  including alcohol abuse."  The records indicated that the applicant received a 
General, under Honorable conditions, discharge after acceptance of his request for Resignation In Lieu of Involuntary Discharge. 
The applicant received two Article  15's, for several instances of failure to attend his required place of duty, namely emergency 
room duty, surgical on-call duty, and ob-gyn rotations, during an internship training period. Additional charges included reporting 
to an alcohol treatment program with the odor of alcohol on his breath, the making of a false official statement, on or about  11 
November 1991, that his father had died, and absenting himself from his place of duty from on or about 28 February 1992 to on or 
about 2  March  1992.  The  applicant provided  testimony that  he  was erroneously informed that  his  father had  indeed died, in  a 
telephone conversation with another physician in training, 
ably aware of his father's actual clinical status.  The 
Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at the time 
applicant also provided written evidence that retired Colone 
a1  diagnosis  should  have  been  that  of  a  depressive 
he  was  evaluated  for  alcohol  abuse,  believed that  the  app 
disorder, a condition which the applicant believed  could have resulted  in  a Medical Evaluation Board and a medical discharge. 
The applicant also testified that he had  established a difficult interpersonal professional relationship with two Air Force medical 
officers during a prior assignment, who then later became reassigned at the same institution (Malcolm Grow Medical Center), and 
that both officers conducted psychiatric evaluations on the applicant, rendering the diagnosis of alcohol dependence.  Implicit in 
the  applicant's  testimony  is  that  the  aforementioned, allegedly  errant,  evaluations  adversely  influenced  the  reason  for  his 
discharge.  While the member's  instances of missed duty rotations were well documented, the Board found no evidence that these 
resulted in the issuance of either letters of counseling or reprimand.  However, they were  later retrieved and utilized among the 
om on or about 28 February  1992 
bases for the member's discharge action. With reference to the applicant's a 
to  on  or  about 2  March  199 
a  weekend), there  is  written 
rd  that  the  applicant informed his 
immediate supervisor (Majo 
of his planned absence in order to 
and his supervisor's secretary 
take care of his vandalized 
ptionally well  as a judge  advocate 
ted the applicant had previous1 
and medical-legal advisor prior to entering upon a period of medical training.  Since the applicant's discharge he has returned to 
the legal profession in the civilian federal service, again with evidence of remarkable job  performance and a range of community 
involvement. 

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. 

However, after collectively considering all  available facts  and  evidence presented in  the  applicant's  case, to  include his  post- 
service activities, the DRB believed that the comparatively brief period of misconduct displayed by the applicant while in training 
was an aberration, and  that his military service should be  more appropriately characterized as Honorable.  However, the reason 
and authority for the applicant's discharge shall remain unchanged. 

Attachment: 
Examiner's Brief 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 

ANDREWS AFB, MD 

FD2005-OO2O4A 

(Former MAJ) (HGH MAJ) (REHEARING) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl  rec'd  a Gen Dish fr Andrews AFB, 
MD on 24 Aug  02 UP AFR 36-2, Chapter 3, para 3-7d (Resignation In 
Lieu of Involuntary Discharge)  Appeals for Honorable Discharge 
and to Change the Reason and Authority  for Discharge. 

2.  OTHER FACTS: 

a.  See attached cy of Examiner's  Brief dtd 4 Aug  04. 

b.  The.AFDRB reviewed case on 9 Sep 04  (non-appearance w/o 

counsel) &  concluded applicant's  discharge should not be changed. 

3.  BASIS ADVANCED FOR REHEARING:  Appl  (DD F'm  293) dtd 20 May 
05.(Change Discharge to Honorable,  and Change the Reason and 
Authority  for Discharge) 

ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF. 

Atch 

1. Applicant's  Issues. 
2.  SAF/MRBR Ltr,8  Oct  04. 
3. AFHQ Form 0-2077, Decisional Document With Attachments. 

May 20,2005 

SAF/MRBR 
550-C Street West, Suite 40 
Randolph AFB, TX 781 504742 

Re: Application for the review of discharge; request for personal appearance 

Dear Members of the B o d  

This letter is submitted to you as an attachment to my application for the review of my 
discharge from the Air Force of August 24,1992 (as Item 7 of DD Form 293) and as a 
request for a personal appearance as detailed below. 

I request a hearing (personal appearance) before the Ah Force Discharge Review Boatd 
ORB) to clarify and reinforce the evidence of improprieties and inequities in my discharge. 
I believe my o@ 
application, dated 23 Jun 2004, sets out a sound basis for the requested 
actions: an upgrade of my discharge, the change of reason and authority for discharge, and 
the change of my reenlistment code.  Therefore, I make as part of my request the original 
application and its attachments submitted in June 2004.. 

In the following cMcation, I will be referdng to the origid application and the DRB's 
Rationale of September 9,2004, FD-2004-00238,  also enclosed.  Upon r e a d q  the decision 
document, it appears the ~RB&isinter~reted or did not understand the evidence submitted 
4 t h  my prior application.  I trust the following comments and those expressed during a 
personal appeatance will 

the evidence and r e c e  any misunderstandings. 

I begin by summarizing the basis of my application, in order to place in context my 
comments about the DRB's  Rationale.  First, my behavior in the Fall of 1991 through the 
Spring of 1992 was out of characte~ ie. aberrant, as evidenced by the rest of my Air Force 
career and pre- and post-service activities.  Second, my c o m d e r  failed to understand, 
address, and present the reason for my aberrant behavior in the discharge proceedings.  He 
erroneously attributed the behavior to alcohol abuse/alcoholism - not a period of 

, of which alcohol abuse was a symptom  Even though his own e x p e

lained my condition in 1992 my commander did not include that information in 
the discharge process as a reason for my aberrant behavior.  Third, he ignored the evidence 
of the root cause of my aberrant behavior either through an innocent failure to appreciate 
the facts as presented by his own expert or due to prejudice because I was challenging the 
possibly unethical decisions by hospital staff and commanders.  In either event, the discharge 
was improper and inequitable.  Fourth, if the underlying cause of the aberrant behavior had 
been appropriately addressed, it is too speculative now to determine what would have been 

 

SAF/MRBR 
May 20,2005 
Page 2 

the outcome of my Air Force career; and the most equitable, present remedy is the relief I 
am herewith requesting. 

My comments now refer to the DRB Rationale.  Before doing so however, I offer the 
ovezuching problem with the Rationale - the Rationale simply misconstrued or ignored the 

submitted by me.  Specifically, it ignored the observations by Colonel (Dr.) 
then Chairman of Psychiatry at Malcolm Grow USAF Medical Center, that fq' 
der, ~ f l * h a d  ignored ~ r g ) e x p e r t  opinion about the underlying cause 

e Rationale ignored the evidence presented by a retired 
echoed the explawtion - depression - 
e stresses I was then experiencing.  CoL 
a closed mind about my medical con 

stated 

- -   - 

statements. Finally, the Rationale ignored the evidence from my 
treating physicians, in-setvice and post-service, that I was experiencing depression, which 
remained untreated until after my discharge. This mis~mders~nstvldin~ of the evidence may be 
seen in many of the Rationale's  comments.  I will hghllght some of those misunderstandmgs 
in the following paragraphs. 

For example, as the DRB approached my first issue re: the discharge was improper, the 
DRB misconstrued the hcts. I understand the analysis of my case would begin with the 
presumption of reguIa.nty in the discharge process.  That is, all was correct in the dmgnosis 
of the reasons for my conduct and the commander's  conclusion that my conduct warranted 
disciplrnarp action and discharge.  Understandably, the presumption of regularity was 
reinforced by my  failure to dispute the underlying facts during the processing of disaphaq 
proceechgs, and my tender of a resignation in lieu of further discharge procedures. 
Unfortunately, the Rationale stopped there and ignored the evidence submitted when the 
DRB concluded all was proper in the discharge process.  As a result, the Rationale focused 
on the misconduct and ignored the evidence of the command's  mistakes leading up to the 
discharge.  The DRB ignored, or at least did not address, the clear and convincing evidence 
of the undedpg causes of my misconduct and the command's  failure to acknowledge those 
causes.  If the DRB believed my evidence was inaccurate, that is to say that the writers of the 
documents were not to be believed, the DRB should have stated that was its conclusion, but 
it did not  No place in the Rationale is my evidence disputed; hence, I must conclude it was 
misunderstood or ignored  Examples of the DRBYs failure to understand the evidence I 
submitted may be seen in each of the Rationale's paagraphs. 

In dealing with the first issue Gdentified by the DBR as improper command action), the 
Rationale asserts the Air Force considered the "circumstances of his alcoholismyy; and then 
the Rationale and DRB ignored the evidence of depression as the source of my aberrant 
behavior, including alcohol abuse.  It ignored my law-abiding, pre-fall1991 behavior as set 
out in my Air Force records, the expert opinions by psychiatrists (including one who advised 
my commander), and my post-service accomplishments, all of which indicate my aberrant 
behavior arose out of a situational depressive state, not "alcoholisnt"  When the Air Force 
offered rehabilitation efforts, it addressed a symptom, alcohol abuse, not the cause of my 
aberrant misconduct  My commander dismissed this diagnosis, which was presented to him 

SAF/MRBR 
May 20,2005 
Page 3 

during the initiation of the discharge.  Additionally, it was nevet brought to the attention of 
the discharge approval authority, SAF/MZB, now SAF/MRB.  Hence, the discbarge was 
improper and inequitable. 

Similarly, h e  DRB held against the application the fact they did not retrieve and read my 
medical records, while ignoring the case file before i t  As a result, I must conclude it 
presumed my application's evidence was inaccurate.  This approach to the evidence can be 
seen in Rationale's vatious observations.  The Rationale refers to a c'claimed" depression, 
despite undisputed, clear evidence of depression ftom the expert wimesses who observed 
me at the time of the abmant behavior and others who successfully treated me for 
depression aftex the dischai-ge.  Likewise, the Rationale states my application "did not 
substantiv 
provide 
shown clearly £tom Dr 
evidence of the cause o 
-ecision 
an error b  not dispassionately reviewing the information available to him.  Equally possible 
is Dr. 
desire to remove fiom his command a "problem,"  whose questions about 
certain treatment issues might be difficult to address, if I had been properly treated and 
returned to duty to raise those same questions.  Or, if he thought I had a depression that 
made me unfit for duty, he realized those issues would have been surfaced if I were referred 
to a medial boatd. 

to ignore the e.xpe.rtise of D 

Likewise, the DRB's  misconception of the nature of the application is seen in the Rationale's 
statement that criticizes the application for not su&esting "each  of (my) inftactions was a 
result of arbitrary and capricious acts or personaliq conflicts."  The application shows the 
 ad ad on to my infmctions was improper and inequitable.  The command did not 
mmma&s 
offer the appropriate rehabilitation regimen when it addressed 
depression (alcohol abuse) while ignoring the expert opinion o 
suggest that if my commander were anydung other than another medical doctor, the DRB 
ve dismissed the expert opinions of the correct c o m e  of tteatment  As Dr. 

tom of 
I would 

improper treatment, being maintained in "the  locked psy 

osis or treatment" only aggravated my "difficulties."  Dr. b 

ttic ward 

decisions may not have arisen to "prejudicial error,"  such as a failure to provide me my 
procedural rights, but it was "an  abuse of.. .authority.. . (this) may have contributed to the 
decision to discharge or the characterization of s b c e . "   (DoDI 1332.28, paragraph 
E4.3.3.2.3) 

Additionally, I cannot overlook the Rationale's  suggestion that it was incumbent upon me, 
whose perception of the world at that time was very skewed (see my father's lettes), to seek 
additional assistance from such agencies as the chaplain, Family Support Center, and Mental 
Health regarding my "stress."  In retrospect those "self-help"  choices may have been 
rational and beneficial  Nevertheless this suggestion however, indicates the DRB failed to 
appreciate the nature of my mental health at the time,  even though my discharge and 
application show I was not acting rationally.  But, I suggest it was equally incumbent upon 
my command to make or suggest such referrals.  In the "normal"  situation where an Air 

SAF/MRBR 
May 20,2005 
pw  4 

Force member displays such aberrant behavior as mine, the command would have done so. 
Therefore, I aver the DRB did not appreciate the evidence of my depression and my 
commander's  failure to offer proper assistance from such resources, such as the chap& 

is 

I was treated inequitably.  poreaver, the Ra 
c:  when I did seek Mental Health assistance, 

stion is 
dvice to Dr. 

Finally, the Rationale's  dismissal of my post-service activities is disappointing. It simply 
states those activities do "not provide a basis of inequity or impropriety.. ." Such a 
conclusion ignores two principles governing the DRB.  First, it ignores the fhct such 
activities may be considered as they more fully contrast my misconduct at that time. In this 
regard, my post-service activities reinforce my actions leading up to my discharge tven 
aberrant and indicate my commander did not fully explore and appreciate the natute of my 
condition.  Second, those activities support fuaher the expert evidence that my depression, 
not alcoholism, was the source of my behavior.  Since the Rationale did not address those 
issues, I must assume the DRB ignored them. 

Due to these various misunderstandings or the failures to appreciate the evidence submitted 
with my application, I desire to present the evidenee to the Board in person, explain it and 
answer any lingering misunderstandings about the impropriety and inequity of my discharge. 

Enclosures: 
As stated 

DEPARTMENT  OF  THE  AIR  FORCE 

AIR  FORCE  DISCHARGE  RWIEW  BOARD 

ANDREWS  AFB,  KD 

(Former MAJ)  (HGH MAJ) 

1.  MATTER  UNDER  RW1B;W:  Appl rec'd a GEN Disch fr Andrews AFB, MD on 24 Aug 02 
UP AFR 36-2, Chapter 3, para 3-7d (Resignation In Lieu of Involuntary Discharge). 
Appeals for Honorable Discharge, and to Change the Reason and Authority for 
Discharge. 

2 .   BACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 19 Jan 56.  Enlmt Age: 23 6/12.  Disch Age: 36 7/12. Educ: 

Doctorate. AFQT: N/A.  A-N/A,  E-N/A, G-N/A,  M-N/A. PAFSC: 09326 -  General 
Practice Physician. DAS: 13 Jun 91. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) ANG 26 Jul 79 -  6 Jun 80  (10 months 11 days) (Inactive). 

(2) Appointed 2Lt in USAFRes 18 Dec 80.  Ordered to active 
duty 24 Mar 81.  Svd: 6 yrs 7 months 29 days, of which AMS is 6 yrs 4 months 23 
days.  1Lt -  Unknown.  Capt -  24 Mar 81.  Maj -  1 Jul 87.  OERs: l,l,l,l,l,l,l. 

3 .   SERVICE  UNDER  REVIEW: 

a.  Ordered to EAD  as Maj 13 Jun 91. Svd: 1 Yrs 2 Mo 11 Das, all AMS. 

b.  Grade Status:  None. 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15,s:  (1) 2 Jul 92, Andrews AFB, MD  -  Article 86.  You, did, on 

or about 21 Jun 92, without authority, fail to go at the 
time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to wit: 
Building 1050, Ward 4B.  Forfeiture of $300.00 pay per 
month for two months.  (Appeal/Denied) (No mitigation) 

(2) 13 Mar 92, Andrews AFB, MD -  Article 86.  You, did, on 

or about 20 Oct 91, without authority, fail to go at the 
time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to wit: 
Building 1050, as the surgery intern on-call. Article 
86.  You, did, on or about 0730 hours on 28 Feb 92, 
without authority, absent yourself from your unit, to 
wit: Malcolm Grow USAF Medical Center, and did remain so 
absent until on or about 0900 hours, 2 Mar 92.  Article 
133.  You did, on or about 11 Nov 91, with intent to 

ly and dishonorably make to Lt COW 

false statement, to wit: that your 

which statement was totally false and 

was known by you to be false, said conduct unbecoming an 
officer and gentleman.  Forfeiture of $900.00 pay per 

month for two months.  (No appeal)  (No mitigation) 

e.  Additional:  (Examiner's Note: The following infractions are listed in 

the Notification Memorandum). 

1. Between o/a 30 Jul 91 &  o/a 27 Aug 91 -  Failure to go. 
2. At divers times, between o/a 23 Oct 91 &  o/a 19 Nov 91 - 
3. Between o/a 23 Oct 91 &  o/a 19 Nov 91 -  False official 

Failure to go. 

statements. 

4. On or about 11 Nov 91 -  False official statement. 
5. On or about 12 May 92, was, while enrolled in an alcohol 

rehabilitation program, drunk. 

6. On or about I Jun 92, was, while enrolled in an alcohol 

rehabilitation program, drunk. 

f.  CM:  None. 

g.  Record of SV: None. 

h.  Awards &  Decs:  MSM W/1 OLC, AFCM, AFAM, NDSM W/1 OLC, AFOUA W/2 OLCS, 

AFOSSTR, AFLSAR W/1 OLC, SAEMR ~ / 1  BS, AFTR. 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS: (8) Yrs  (8) Mos  (22) Das 

TAMS: (7) Yrs  (7) Mos  (5) Das 

4.  BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 24 Jun 04. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable, and Change the Reason and Authority for 

Discharge) 

ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF. 

ATCH 
I. Applicant's Issues. 
2. Justification. 
3. Letters &  Documentation. 
4. U.S. Government Service Documentation. 

DEPARTMENT  OF THE AIR FORCE 
MALCOLM GROW USAF MEDICAL CENTER (AMC) 

, 

FROM:  MGMC/SG 

Andrews  AFB  DC  20331-5300 

J. 

SUBJ:  N o t i f i c a t i o n . o f   Action  Under  AFR  36-2 

TO: 

' 

.

.

.

.

 

MGMC/SGE 
.  . 

. 

. 

Major, 

,  , . .   ;, 

. .  

1.  I am  i n i t i a t i n g  a c t i o n   against  you  under  AFR  36-2,  ~ h a y t e r  3, 
paragraph  3-7d. 
. 

.  . 

. 

.  . 

r i  

.  :: . . .   :. 
.
.

.

.

 

:

. 

. . /  

i . 2 .  . + I  am.  t a k i n g  t h i s   a c t i o n   f o r   t h e   f o l l o w i n g   reasons: 

. . .  

a.  You  d i d ,   a t  Andrews  A i r   Force  Base,  Mary1 a.nd,  between  on  o r  
' ..  about :30 J u l y   1991,  and  on  o r   a b o u t 2 7   August  1991,  ,without. a u t h o r i t y ,  
togo,;,at . t h e  time  prescribed  t o  y o u r  appo.inted  place o f  .duty,  t o  
- - - f a i l  
.:'  . . w i t :   .;  B u i l d i n g   1050,'  for  Emergency  Room  d u t i e s  .: 

.

.

 

.  . 
.

.'? 

. , . , ; .   '. 

.;.:;:: 
. . . .  
 .., 

, 

,. 

.  : 

: . . . .  

. 

: *  

: ,  

.

.

... 
.

.

 

. 

. 
.

;.;.b;;  You. d i d ,   a t  Andrewi  A i r   Force 'Base,  ~ a r ~ l

.
_-.20 October-1991,.without  a u t h o r i t y ,   f a i l  t o ' g o  a t ,  t h e   t i m e p r e s c r i b e d  
;;. : ,  t o y ~ u r ~ a p ~ o i n t e d p l a c e  
-.intern:.on  c a l l  . ,  . 

t o  w i t :   B u i l d i n g   1050,'  as  t h e   surgery 

and,  'on o r   about 

o f  duty, 

 

' 

, 

c..  You  d i d ,   a t   the  National  Naval  Medical  Center,  Bethesda, 

..Maryland,  a t  d i v e r s   times,  between  on  o r   about  23  October  1991'and  on 
o r   about  19  November  1991,  w i t h o u t   a u t h o r i t y ,   f a i l   t o  go  a t   t h e   time 
prescribed  t o  your  appointed  place  o f  duty,  t o  w i t : '   Department, o f  
O b s t e t r i c s   and  Gynecology. 

d: 

YOU  did,  a t   the  ~ a t i o n a l  Naval  Medical  Center,  Bethesda, 

-  Maryland,  between  on  o r   about  23  October  1491  and  on  o r  
19  November  1991,  w i t h   i n t e n t   t o  deceive,  make  t o  D r .   &:n 
statement, 
and  t h a t  your  f a t h e r   had  died,  which  statements  were  t o t a l l y   f a 1  se  and 
were  then 

t h a t   you  had  been   laced  on  quarters  f o r   i l l n e s s  

. '.  .  known'by  you  t o  be  so  f a l s e .  

t o .  w i t :  

o f f i c i a l  

.
 
" ;   , 

.

.

..-::;; 

'.? 

e . :   Y O U  d i d , .  a t  ~ n d ~ e w s  A i  

'  .  11 '-  November  1991,  w i t h  '  i n t e n t  
secijri ng  1 eave,  make  t o   L t  Col 
st.atement,.to  w i t :  
t h a t   your 
t o t a l  1 y  f a 1  se ' and  was .then kno 

,

.

.

 

f.  You  d i d ,   a t  Andrews  A i r   Force  Base,  Maryland,  on  o r   about 

28  February  1992,  w i t h o u t   a u t h o r i t y ,   absent  yoursel f  from  your  u n i t ,   t o  
w i t :   Malcolm  Grow  USAF  Medical  Center  located  a t   B u i l d i n g   1050, 
Andrews  A i r  Force  Base,  Maryland,  and  d i d  remain  absent  u n t i l   on  o r  
about  2  March  1992. 

AMC - GLOBAL REACH FOR AMERICA 

-- 

h.  You were, at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland, on or about 

12 May 1992, while enrol led  in an alcohol rehabilitation program, 
drunk . 

L 

i.  You yere, at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland, on or about 

1 June 1992, while enrolled in an alcohol rehabilitation program, 
drunk., 

Attached are copies of documentary evidence to support this act ion. 
The worst possible discharge that may be approved for the reasons cited 
is under other than honorable conditions. 

3.  Familiarize yourself with AFR  36-2, particularly paragraph 4-10, 
which outlines the rights afforded you in this action, and paragraph 
4-13, which explains the action the major commande 
of your reply to this correspondence.  Contact Ca 
Area Defense Counsel at 6519, to discuss the proc 
s and options.  If you decline legal co 

at 4407, 89 MSSQ/MSP Chief, CBPO for counseling 
ights and options. 

4.  Within 15 calendar days after your receive this correspondence, you 
may: 

a.  If eligible to retire, apply for voluntary retikement to be 

effective on the first day of the month  immediately following 
notification of approval by the Secretary of the Air Force.  If less 
than 15 calendar days between the date your are notified and the first 
day of the month following notification, the effective date of your 
retirement will be the first day of the second month after 
notification.  If you have 20 or more years of active mi 1 itary service 
but you do not have the required minimum 10 years of active 
commissioned service to qualify for retirement in officer status, you 
may apply for separation under the provisions of AFR 36-12, table 2-7, 
rule 1, to enlist for the purpose of retirement in the enlisted grade 
in  1 ieu of further action under AFR  36-2. 

b.  If ineligible to retire, tender your resignation according to 
AFR 36-12, table 2-7, rule 1, to be effective within 10 calendar days 
following notification of acceptance by the Secretary of the Air Force. 
By tendering your resignation you will be disqualified for separation 
or readjustment pay if you are otherwise qualified to receive such pay. 
If you tender your resignation, it will be with the understanding that, 
if accepted, you will receive a under other than honorable conditions 
discharge, unless the Secretary of the Air Force determines that you 
wi 11 be honorably discharged. 

c.  Submit any written statement or other documentary evidence that 

you feel should be considered in evaluating your case.  If you are 
unable to prepare your statements or documentary evidence within the 

time specified above, you may request more time as outlined in AFR 
36-2, paragraph 4-12. 

5-  Within 15 calendar days after you receive this letter, send it 
without attachments, by endorsement directly to HQ AMC/DPAFQ.  Include 
in your endorsement: 

a..  A statement that you have/have not: 

( I )   Appl ied for voluntary retirement, or 

(2)  Tendered your resignation. 

If" you apply for voluntary retirement or tender your resignation, 
attach a copy of your application to this endorsement. 

b.  A statement that you do/do not desire to comment.  If you 

desire to comment, you may attach any statements or documentary 
evidence 'you want to submit.  If you have fequested more time as 
out lined in paragraph 4c of this letter, attach a copy of your request. 

statement that you have been counseled by Cap 
the Area Defense Counsel.  If you decline leg 
indicate that you have been counseled by Capt 
Chief, CBPO and that you fully understand your rights a 
this action. 

d.  You may request to be placed on excess leave provided 

processing of this separation act ion no longer requires your presence. 
AFR 35-9 provides guidance on excess leave. 

6.  Within 24 hours after you receive this correspondence, sign and 
date two copies of  the letter of acknowledgment.  Send one copy to this 
headquarters and one copy to HQ AMCJDPAFQ. 

Commander 

4 Atchs 
la-1 . Evidence 
2.  AFR 36-2 
3.  AFR 36-12 
4.  Letter of Acknowledgment 

(2 cys)