AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
: SRA
| PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
MEMBER SITTING
Xx
| x
Xx
Xx
| x
ISSUES A94.05 INDEX NUMBER A67.90
1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER
01 Jul 2009 FD-2008-00237
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 submit an
application to the AFBCMR.
Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant’s request.
SICNATIRE OF RECORDER ya x SHINATE OF ROARD PRESIDENT 4
SAF/MRBR , SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB; MD 20762-7001
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous
CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2008-00237
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:
Issue. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because he served for 11 '4 years with no disciplinary
actions against him. He contends he “took a General Discharge” because the Air Force was down-sizing.
The applicant request that his discharge be upgraded so he can reenlist in the Air Force Reserve. Contrary to
the applicant’s contention, the records indicate the applicant received one Article 15 involving 10 UCMJ
offenses, two Letters of Reprimand, and one Letter of Counseling. The Article 15 covered numerous
instances of the applicant being absent without leave and making false official statements. His misconduct
appeared to be largely alcohol-related. The notification memo noted that the applicant was sent to an in-
patient alcohol treatment facility but continued to consume alcohol following his release from the program.
The DRB opined that through these administrative actions and the Air Force’s attempts to help the applicant
overcome his alcohol addiction, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The
Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he
made in his most recent enlistment. 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
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00181
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) PERSONAL APPEARANCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE AFSN/SSAN atc |__| x RECORD REVIEW ;] NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION a ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING OTHER DENY | x Xx x x Xx ISSUES 45 99 INDEX NUMBER A67.90 HEB A92.21 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A01.00 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 13 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00156
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND GR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL VOTE OF THE:BOARD MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY xX x x x SS ws 7 jl — ms mm Tr a 5 ms ae Tn ISSUES A93.19 INDEX NUMBER AG67.10 EXHIBITS SU MIL EES A93.23 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THEBOARD A94.05 2 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00078
*Reason and Authority +Reenlistment Code EUR SOT a f s NE TO: FROM: ; SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL Ban EES AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD §50 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2009-00078 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00217
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AFSN/SSAN AMN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW : | NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY x x Xx x x ISSUES A92.35 INDEX NUMBER A67.90 - ATUBTES SUB : 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00301
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) PERSONAL APPEARANCE NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION TYPE GEN AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE AFSN/SSAN RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL oes MEMBER SITTING OTHER DENY xX x | | Xx Xx x ISSUES A93.11 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED...
AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2009-00204
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FUKRUE DISCHAKGE KEVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE AIC AFSN/SSAN PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION + ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING ; x | i Xx | ' xX x { x | sooves 93.33 INDEX NUMBER A67 1 0 94.05 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 \APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00389
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. The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00142
THE ATTACHED AIR LORCE DISCHARGE REV EW SOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant’s request. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2010-00036
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE AFSN/SSAN PERSONAL APPEARANCE TYPE GEN | | x | RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING GEN x Xx x x Xx ISSUES A94.05 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 es ] |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 |APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00546
FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. ‘hey found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.