'	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
'I '	 	
I	--'ITIAL)	i
-
TYPE  UOTH	I	PERSONAL AJ'Pt;AKA1'lCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC     I        OTHER	I	DENY
--
x x
x
x x
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NUMBER	A94.07	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED  TO THE BOARD
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 DATE	CASE NUMBER

18 May 2005	FD-2004-00104
Al'PLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AITACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAJ\}) DECISIONAL RATIONALE

Case heard at Wash ington, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to subm it an application to the AFBCMR.

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

.<.-

-	/) ,,....,	\

-
TO:

If	-	,•n

ROM:

 	JJA I J<.:   !l/1111   005 	
--------------

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, JRD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB. TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
I
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00104	

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 that 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:

Applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He contends that he was already being considered for involuntary separation with an under honorable conditions (general) discharge and that if he had not been charged with the court-martial charges of conspiracy to introduce narcotics on a military installation, dereliction of duty for not reporting another airman's involvement with drugs, and introduction of narcotics on a military installation, he would have been separated with the general discharge.  In spite of his belief that the evidence against him was suspect, the applicant nonetheless requested discharge in lieu of court-martial.  He acknowledged that his discharge would be characterized as under other than honorable conditions.  The DRB believes his misconduct associated with the court-martial charges, along with three nonjudicial punishment actions for dereliction of duty, damage to government property, driving while intoxicated, wrongful alteration of a military identification card, disobeying a lawful order, assault, and underage drinking, support service characterization of under other than honorable conditions.  The DRB concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military mem bers.  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