A IR FORCE DISCHA RGE REV IEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

I I l'I·.. (i EN
I-  COl!,,.SEL

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE

AB
x	I	RECORD   REVIEW

,	,  !\.\1\I E or COL!\ EL .\'\D OR ORG1\!\17"\TIO:"	ADDRESS AND OR ORGA'ilZA TIO!\ OF COV!\SEL

x
VOTE 01''THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTf lC:	OTHFR

DENY

x x

1

t

I
h1 -l-·:- ---------------

x x

,1!\.DEX__!\_L:-1B-1·:R---------------+---- .E;xlllB-_T_S_S_U.BMIT_fE_'D_T_O TH-_E_B_O_A_RD -X	_

A94.53	A66.00

	2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
	1·.	3	!£HER OF NOTIFICATION 		
	4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
		COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TllE BOARD	
		ADDITIONAL EXlllBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	

1!	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
f
i
j
I
1
I

-----------+,I ---

I	i
I   111-.\Rl:\C D,.\ n.	CASI-. !\U1BER

J     27 Dec 2005	I   FD-2005-00286

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

!   ·\1'1'1.1<  .11\ I   '.i  l''lli· 1\NIJ fill· llOAHIJ S llf.{'lJON. I. llA!IONAL Alli: llf:>('USEIJ ON '111E A'ITACllEJl AIR l'O('.E D!SfHAROE  REV!hW l!O/\fU> Dl'CISlONAL RATIONAi.i'
II C1se  hea rd a t  Wash ington , D.C.
I
! Ad\'isc  a ppl i ca n t  of  t he decision  of  t he  Board, the  right  to a personal  appearance with/without  counsel,  and  the  right  to
I
I   su bmi t a n appl ication to t he AFBCM R .
I
! Names  and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applica nt's request.
I

I
i

I

I

 	

 	I
_   -- --	-	-----.. _LN_v_u_J.(1)..ll.M_. ._EN_·T· ....•·..·-- ---- -- -------D!A_T_E_:_1_21_2s_12_oos	_
YROM:

Si\f-I M Rirn
'ii C STR HT Wl'ST. SUITE 40
IV\NDOLPI I AF8, TX 78 I:i0-4742

SECRETARY  UY THE AIR  FORCE PERSONNEL COL''\CIL AIR YORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND  DR. EE WING. 3RD fl..OOR ANDREWS AFB, M J) 20762· 7002

AFH Q FORM  0-2077, J AN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

upgrade of d ischarge, thus the appl icant's d ischarge should not be changed. Attachmen t:
Ex am iner's Brief

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00286	

GENERAL:  The appl ican t appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The appl ica nt was offered a personal  appearance  before  the Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB) bu t declined  to exercise  this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors lead ing to the discharge.

FIN DIN GS:  Upgrade of d ischarge is denied.

The  Boa rd  finds  tha t  nei ther  the  ev idence  of  record  nor  that  provided  by  the  appl icant  substantiates  an i ncq u i t y or impropriety that woul d justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Appl icant received  a General  Discharge  for Drug Abuse.   Applicant contends that there were mistakes made and lessons l earned throu ghou t his experience serving in the Air Force and that he is prepared to go to school and better himself and wou ld appreciate a second chance in l ife.  The DR B was pleased to see that the
applica nt was doi ng well and movi ng on wi th his l ife; however, no ineq u ity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested  or found. The records indica ted the applicant received  two Article  15s, one for twice failing to go at the t ime prescri bed to his appointed place of duty and one for, on divers occasions, w rongfull y usi ng
ma riju ana, five Letters of Reprimand  for miscond uct to include involvement  i n a physical  and verbal
a l tercation with a  local national security guard, reporting to du ty unshaven, exhibition driving in dormitory
, parki ng lots, fai lure to go, and sleeping on duty, two Letters of Counseling, one for financial irresponsi bil i ty and one for failing to follow guidance to prevent wi nd damage to a government vehicle, and one Letter of Ad monishmen t for failure to go. The DR B opined that through these administrative actions, the applica nt hau ample opportu nities to change his negative behavior.  The Board concluded the miscond uct was a
signifi cant departure  from conduct expected of all military members.   The characteriza tion of the discharge recei ved by the appl ican t was found to be appropr iate.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge  Rev iew  Board  concludes  that  the  discharge  was  consistent   with  the proc du ral and substantive requ irements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge au thority  and that the applicant was provided  full administrative  due process.

I n view of t he foregoing findings the Boa rd further concludes that there exists no legal or equ itable basis for