AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AB

RECORD REVIEW

AFSN/SSAN

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

x

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

x x

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

x
x
x

1 !ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 !APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	ILETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	IBRIEF 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

24 Sep 2010	FD-2008-00384

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.

SAF/MRBR
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, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00384	

The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB). He initially accepted the offer, but later contacted the DRB and stated that he would be unable to travel to appear personally.  He then requested 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. 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: Applicant contends that his discharge with a general service characterization was inequitable because "it was based on one isolated incident in my 4 years [and] 10 months of service." The record indicates that the applicant was discharged for Misconduct-Drug Abuse. In a random urinalysis administered in July of 2006, applicant tested positive for cocaine metabolites. On 16 August 2007, he faced trial by special court-martial and was found guilty of wrongful cocaine use. His sentence consisted of reduction to the grade of airman basic and confinement for three months. In his subsequent discharge proceeding, the separation authority determined that applicant's misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his performance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.

Contrary to applicant's contention, his wrongful use of cocaine was not the only act of misconduct he committed during his career. Records also indicate that he absented himself without authority from his place of duty between 23 and 27 December 2004, that he misused his government travel card on divers occasions during December of 2004 and January of 2005, and that he dishonorably failed to pay a just debt in February of 2005. For those three acts, applicant was offered and accepted nonjudicial punishment pursuant to Article 15, UCMJ.  His punishment consisted of suspended reduction to the grade of airman, forfeiture of
323.00 pay, 14 days of extra duty, and a reprimand. These matters were not cited as a basis for applicant's discharge; however, this derogatory information was made available to the separation authority prior to his decision to discharge applicant.

CONCLUSION: 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 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