AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOAI'"" UV A DTN lHU"'.ORD
INITIAL)

TYPE GEN	l'EUl'IAL Ar r£<CE
,		. NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES	No

x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

.	.
:;.- .,..-;.  ;._::-.··'.." ••:---.'f-..r .=.-;..· - •:':,c   -

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

x

ISSUES

A93.17

INDEX NUMBER

x x
x x
A67.70

A93.07	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

16 Aug 2005	FD-2005-00044

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:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1S3S COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS  AFB, MD 10761-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00044	
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: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because his ability to serve was  impaired  due to marital and family problems. The applicant received a general discharge for misconduct, specifically, drug abuse and minor disciplinary infractions.   His misconduct  included numerous missed appointments, failure to go, financial irresponsibility and finally, a positive urinalysis. The member received a Letter of Reprimand, a Letter of Counseling, counseling from the base financial advisor, and numerous verbal counselings from his supervisor, first sergeant and commander. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board 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