AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER  (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

-'    ----------------------·'

:·------------·:

'	'	AB
'	'

''	''

TYPE GEN	RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL	NAME OF COllNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION l YE-s     ....   --No---I
I x

Al>l>l<ESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER    SITTING	.. - --· ·	1

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

-.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ->--- --------------+-- --+-- --1- ---- --------1
''	x
''
r!
'	x
r-:'
'	x
e--':
'	x
r-:'
''	x

EXHIBITS SUBM ITTED TO THE BOARD

'-------------------------------------- ''
ISSUES

A92.0l
A94.05

A66.00

1	ORDER APPOf NTING TH E ROA R D

2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BR I EF OF PERSON NEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TIIE BOA R D
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMfTTED AT TI ME OF
PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE R ECOR DI NG or PERSONAL APPEARANCE llE

HEAKIN(;   DATE	CASE NUMBER

22 Mar 2007	FD-2006-00416
APPLICANT'S TSS!JE ANO THE ROARD'S DECISIONAL RAliONAL ARE DISCUSSbDON THE AITACHED AIR FORCh DISCHARGE RbVIEW BOARll l.lbCISIONAT. RATIONALE

Case heard in 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.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------­	-------1
[7	INDORSEMENT	DATE:  4/13/2007

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

FROM:

SECl<ETAl<Y OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD 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-2006-004 t 6	

GENERAL:   The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) 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  appl icant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1.  Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service.   The record indicates that the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana and introducing 9.5 grams of marijuana onto an installation used by and under the control of the armed forces. The applicant received a reduction to Airman Basic and forfeiture of $636.00 for two months.  The applicant appealed and received a forfeiture of pay of $636.00.  The Board took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.  However, the Board found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.  The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

Issue 2:  The applicant states he has not been able to obtain meaningful employment and without the upgrade he will be condemned to medial employment.  He would like a second chance at life.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the discharge characterization was having on the applicant, but this was not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

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