I
i	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD H EARING RECORD	-

! N.\ !\..f li'"'' ..:L'U''"''' ,............. . ,.... ,,,_.,   - ------- "'. INITIAL)

GR<\DE

lnPF GEN
l1 ·	COUNSEL

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE
, ,,\I E OF l'OCNSEI. •\'ll Oil ORG/\1'17 '\TIO'li

AB
x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS /\i'iU OR OR<;Mi!ZAT!Oi' OF COU'liSEL

x

1

I
I	MEMBER SITTING

VOTE OF THE BOARD
HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTI IER	DENY

1	-----------------	-+- ---+- ---t--	-+- --+	1
x

I

r
I
L
I
ri ;,,1 t·:.-;

A92.21

'''lEX Nli lllER

A66.00

x
x
x x
EXHIBITS SUBMITIED TOTHEBOARD 	

l	J	ORDER  APPOINTING  THL  HOARD
I	2	APPLICATION   FOR  REVIEW  01·  DISCHARGE
'1',	3	LElTER    OF   NOTIFICATION
I	4	BRIFF OF Pl-RSONNl:l . 1 11 .E
I	COUNSEL   s RELFASI' TO THF  BOARD
I	ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMrlTED ;\ f TIMI' OF
I	PERSONAL   APPEARANCT
1    -----·----------+-------------------+--+-T-_A_PE__RE_c_·o_R_L)_lN_c_;_o_F_l'L_R_s·o_N_A_I._A_PP_J_:t\_R_A_N_c·_r	_
j    111-. \Ill'(; IMTI'.	I  CASE'l \lllFR
I 29 Dec 2005	I FD-2005-00269
!  .\i'l'l JC·.'\>' I  ,, IS'iL'l ,\Nil Tl !I. llO/\RD S D1:1'ISlllN/\l. RATIONAL MH' DlC\J'.> U) ON TllF. ATJ'l\CllEP /\J R!·URCE \)JS(:flAROlo R.l\¥VIEW JlOAllD DloC'ISIONl\L RATIONAi.i'

!

I Case hea rd at  Wash ington,  D.C.

\
I   Ad vise  appl icrnt  of the  decision  of the Boa rd, t he righ t  to a personal  appeara nce wit h/wit hout  counsel, a ncl  t he righ t  to
I su bm i l a n appli\.·at ion to t he AFBCM R.

Na mes a nd votes will be made available to t he applicant at t he applicant's request.

• ,, ...   •Tr VI..  ()J:_J.t'tcnR ll'F'	-- --	 	

!'():

----    ---..·-----------------------rFROM•

..

S.-\1' ·1RIW
'"O (' STRLl'T WEST. SU ITE 40
IL\: DOIJ'l IAl 15. TX 7S I'ill-4742

DATE:  12/29/2005

SECHETAHY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSO'l;, EL COl:'liUL AIH FORCE I>ISCllAR<;E REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMANI> DR. EE Wl,G, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

------------------------------ ----------------------------

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)

Previous edition will he usc,d

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00269	

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 received a General Discharge for Drug Abuse.

Applicant contends that since his discharge he has avoided any situations that may have negative repercussions, has held three jobs requiring initial and subsequent drug screenings and has passed every screening with no complications, is in compliance with his agreement to reimburse DFAS for the unsuccessful completion of his six year enlistment bonus contract, and realizes that he made a huge mistake during his tour of duty with the Air Force and has turned his life around and moved it in a positive direction. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and moving on with his life; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.  The records indicated the applicant received two Article l 5s, one for wrongfully using marijuana and for wrongfully using Corciden, and the other for failing to go at the time prescri bed to his appointed place of duty and for willfully disobeying a lawful command, a Letter of Reprimand for damaging government property, injuring his hand, fleeing the scene of the crime, and refusing to answer questions, and one Record of Individual Counseling for failing a monthly dorm room inspection.  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.

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