--------------------------- '

AIR FORCE DISCH ARGE REVIEW BOA RD HEARIN G RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST M IDDLE IN ITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN	
·..-------------------------- ·'
'	I	SRA
i	''............	

..--------------.
....''.

TYr•:   VOTH	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
··•·· •C<JJ l'ilfL	NAME OF COUNSEi, AND OR ORGANIZATION	I ADDRESS AND OR Ol<GANIZA TJON OF COUNSEL YES	No
x
I •:> .......   :.•.•••:....•	. •<<H:]: ··········•··· •..vo'fE.ii!lF ·1:'"•Bi!l'.14.l!iP

I

..	.,,.,., ....
. ......•/ ...•

MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

'

'-------------------------------- '

x	+ *

'

''	x	+*
'
r--:

'''
,..;

'

'

'

'
r-:

x	+*
x	+ *

'	x

'	+ *
L••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

.. .. ...	}]\•><••·        EXHtBlTS  §.V:OMITTEq:tf().THE:l()f\RD	Ir: · ··
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRlEF OF PERSON N EL FILE COUNSEL'S  RELEASE  TO Tl!E  BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXI llBITS SUBMITTED J\ T TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
I
TAPE RECOR DI NG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HE

HEARING llATF.	CAS>: NUMBER

15 Mar 2007	FD-2006-00071
1····· APPUCANI s ISSIJ.!fAl'iD nm ll0Alll!'S••·os!!21'it:L RA1111JNAL ARE DlSC(J$!111Q•••  :.1'E "	IU      1.<tU.H'li
:··· .	.	.)	·····•ii ...... ...,.i i	i	...	· ··········	I:::i:ii·······	··.·····•··· •····· •• :i:.• .i:.;•;••••• '.AKU
Case heard in Washington, D.C.

.·.    .:;.\;   . RA '"'.C(!!:J!ll}iiit:t:·   ...

····.·. ··•·i	) ...
·ii·····················	i

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the ri ght to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes wi ll be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

+ Change of reenlistment eligibility code is denied.
* Change of reason and authority is denied.

,_,-	-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---	- -·

'' '''

1·············.i···················ft.···   ..        .••·	i/ )i     WW	········.1	• • ·:NTi/fIIJ/	............	·.••:I)ii:I:::::::   ···	.. ....	J:::::• ·.   DATE: 31il::li(l0'7	/ ? •  t

................ ....

TO,

. ···········

\}...............	······•

SAF/MRl:lR	SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE Pt:l<SONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHAl<G  REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40

1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR

RANDOLPH  AFB,  TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD Z0162-7002

AFHQ FO RM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-Y2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2006-00071	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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

FINDINGS: The Board grants partial relief. The discharge is upgraded to general. However, change of reason and authority for discharge and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an inequity that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the record and evidence provided  by applicant, the Board finds the characterization of the discharge improper.

ISSUE:  The applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant received an Under Other Than Honorable Condition (UOTHC) discharge from the United States Air Force Reserve for drug abuse.  The record indicates that the member tested positive for Methamphetamines during a random urinalysis, with a result of 2525 ng.  Following a review of all available facts and evidence in this case, the Board found sufficient mitigation to substantiate upgrade of the discharge to General.   In accordance with, Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, Attachment 2.2.3, "conduct in the civilian community of a member not on active duty or active duty training may be used to characterize service as UOTHC only if the conduct affects the performance of military duties."  The Board opined that the applicant's conduct did not affect the performance of his military duties at that time.  In addition, AFI 36- 3209, paragraph 3.24, states that all UOTHC cases require Secretary of the Air Force approval and must be referred to the Air Force Personnel Council for review.  In this case, the member's discharge package was
not forwarded.   Therefore, the Board agreed that the discharge characterization be upgraded to General. However, the Board found no evidence of inequity or impropriety to substantiate upgrading the reason and authority or the reenlistment code.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was inconsistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation; it was not within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was not provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by a General discharge; the Board concluded that  there  existed no legal or equitable basis to change the reason and authority or the reenlistment code, therefore no changes were made in those areas.	
Attachment: Examiner's Brief