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 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
05 Aug 2010 FD-2009-00156
Oe . ARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ONTTHE ATTACHED ATR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW HOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.
ee
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.
TE: 8/11/2010
SAF/MRBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
22a 74 qs is AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET ST, 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-2009-00156
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
and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.
The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.
FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.
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. Applicant infers discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh because he was suffering from
depression. The records indicated the applicant received three Article 15s, a Letter of Reprimand, and a
Letter of Counseling. Applicant’s misconduct included several alcohol-related incidents, disobeying orders
or failing to follow orders, failure to go, and failure to remain on station. While a mental health evaluation
dated August 10, 2004, recommended discharge on the basis of applicant’s mental health condition, the legal
review of the administrative discharge for minor disciplinary infractions addresses this. It states “Although
the diagnosis provides and additional basis for discharge under paragraph 5.11.9, Mental Disorders,
discharge under that provision is not appropriate when the Airman’s record would support discharge for
misconduct.” The DRB opined that through the administrative actions taken by the unit, the applicant had
ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. ‘(he Board concluded that the negative aspects of the
applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The
characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.
CONCLUSION: 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 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00093
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIMF OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 01 Jul 2010 FD-2009-00093 CC OAPPLICANT’SASSUB AND. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.
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.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00535
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1438 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR RANDOLPH AMFB, 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-2008-00535 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 and requests that the review be completed based...
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 | CY2009 | FD2008-00203
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 SRA AFSN/SSAN x RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY X X Xx X X ISSUES A94.05 INDEX NUMBER A67.10 ee A I ae 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...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00404
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN a SRA _ TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL ” VOTE OF THE BOARD : GEN UOTHC OTHER ‘DENY x x Xx Xx x | issues A203. 2~Ot*~*«
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00588
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN Pe AMN P| TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW . 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. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct, especially his unlawful...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2010-00420
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD AFSN/SSAN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW [AME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY x xX x x aac x ISSUES A93.23 INDEX NUMBER AO7. The Board found that the applicant’s contention pertaining to her mental disorders had no merit. After a thorough and complete review of her medical records, the Board was unable to...
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 | 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.