AIR FORCE DJSCH A RGE REV IEW BOA RD HEARING R ECORD
\·    !------------------
ITIAL)	GRADE

AB

J

- ,..-.	--------- ---------+----------'•---
PERSONAL A PPEARANCE	X	RECORD .REV_I_E_W 	

NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZATION

MEMBER SITTING

AIJORESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COIJNSEL

x
x

JSSllF.S

A66.00

	2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
	3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
	4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL	
		COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
		TAPE RECORDING Of- PERSONAi. APPEARANCE	
HEARING DATE

26 Jan 2006	CASt:NUMHt:R

FD-2004-00283				

Case heard at Washi ngton, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an appl ication to the AFBCMR. Names and votes wi ll be made avai lable to the applicant at the appl icant's req uest.

FROM;
SAF/MRBR	SECRETARV OF THE AIR FORCI! PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE l>ISCllARGE REVll!W BOARI>
550 C STREET WEST, SU ITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING. 3RI> FLOOR
RANDOLPll AFB, TX 781 50-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002		

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

x
x
A66.0i O--------c==Ex.u.IB.l TSSJ:.! l:MJElEl,l,:J. :, · iill· ··   n==··
A94.39	ORDER APPOINTING TIJF BOARD 	

•

 	

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR	
FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBEn

FD-2004-00283	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) via videoconference from the Florida State Armory, with DRB deliberation held at Andrews AFB, Maryland, but declined to exercise this right.

Additional exhibits and evidence submitted: None

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of his discharge. Additionally, the Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant that substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant submitted no additional issues that challenged either the basis for his discharge or characterization of his military service. The applicant received a General discharge on 3 January 2002 for misconduct - drug abuse. Specifically, on 26 November 2001 the applicant received an Article 15 for the wrongful use of marijuana. In his written response to the Article 15, the applicant alleged that he was "innocent," because what "[he] actually smoked was a cigar and not marijuana." Additionally, although not listed among reasons for the applicant's discharge in the Notification Memorandum, the applicant had also received three Letters of Reprimand, dated 3 October 2001, 12 October 2001, and 14 November 2001 respectively, for being late for duty on "numerous occasions," failure to inspect a piece of mission essential equipment, namely a "CTK LR 014," and failure to meet established dormitory standards on re-inspection of his quarters. The Board noted the  applicant's stellar pre-service record wherein he maintained high academic standards, achieving membership in Who's Who Among American High School Students and acceptance to attend the US Naval Academy Preparatory School, among other accolades. Thus, the Board considered the plausibility that the charges against the applicant may represent an aberration and not his overall character. Although the applicant alleges that he has "never smoked marijuana in [his] lifo..."and believes that he was "duped" into admitting he used the drug by his friends, the Board was deprived of an opportunity to consider an upgrade of the applicant's discharge either through his verbal testimony or the presentation of other supporting evidence to the Board. Therefore, with the presumption of regularity in the case under review, the Board found no basis upon which to justify a change in either the reason for the applicant's discharge or the characterization of his military service.

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