AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

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

AMN

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

'

'

- - - - - - - - - - -------------------------·	'

TYPE GEN

I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE

x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

t:i;!VNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL  AND OR ORGANIZATION
1-  '-T--  -I
YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,:-----------------!------+------+----+-----!	I
'

I--<

'''	x
''
'''	x

h	'
''
''
1-o	'

'

'''
i-o	'
''' ''
SSUES	A92.03	INDEX NUMBER	A66.00 A94.05
A92.00

x

x x

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTJFICA TJON
4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Apr 2007	FD-2006-00475

.. .. .	.    .. .	:	..	:·:···

APPLICANT'S ISSUTl AND THE BOARD'S DECISIO'!'AL RATIONAL AIU! DISCUSSED ON THE ATIACHED}JR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD,OJ!CISIONAL 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 req uest.

'	'

--------------------------------------------------------------------1'_----------	--------------------	1
'	'

'	'

'	':
- - - - -, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.- -v- - "ViNooasEMi:N-f""", ".----,- -- --- --- --- - -- --. -- - . --- --- --- --- D ErA/24/20()1

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
13J3 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD 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-2006-00475	

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:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and based on one isolated incident after serving 36 months in the Air Force.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15, for misconduct.  The Article 15 was administered for wrongful use of marijuana.  He was punished with a reduction in grade to Airman, 45 days of extra duty and a reprimand.  The Board concluded the applicant's 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.

Issue 2.  Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance report, awards and other accomplishments.  They 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.

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