AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x

MSGT

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

X*+ X*+
X*+

X*+ X*+

ISSUES

A66.00

INDEX NUMBER

AOl.13 AOl.39

2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE

CASE NUMBER

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.

*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment Code

-

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

I
FD-2008-00347	I

i--	.....a.	--t i

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and   I

authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

!!i

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge  Review Board  (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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

FINDING:   The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code.
1
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an  1
inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.	i

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  He further contends the Administrative Discharge Board was prejudicial, his counsel was inadequate and lacked sufficient time to prepare for the board, and lastly was an Army National Guard officer and lacked the experience of the Air National Guard policy and procedures.  The records indicated the applicant was discharged in accordance with AFI 36-3209, Misconduct - Drug Abuse.  The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.  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 contentions and 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.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the  i procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the i discharge authority and 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief

.._

I
   ,]