I	EIARGE REVIEW BO.ARP HEARING RECORD
f	UTIAL)	, ,

TYPE GEN

YES	No
x

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 x x
x

ISSUES

A94.53 A66.00

INDEX NUMIH!OK

A67.70

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

17 Aug 2005	FD-2005-00043

Case heard at 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.

TO:	FROM:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00043	

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 the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was .unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: The records indicated the applicant received  an Article  15 for wrongful  use of marijuana.  The Board noted the applicant was age 21 when his misconduct occurred, essentially  the  same age as other airmen who complete their enlistments without disciplinary infractions, and there was no evidence he did not know right from wrong. The Board further concluded the misconduct was a significant departure  from conduct expected of all military members. 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.

Inview 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	

•     •