AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERV ICE MEMBER (LAST,   'IRST MIOOLE INITIAL)

GRAm:

AB
X	RECORD  REVIEW

AFSN/SSAN

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION Ot' COUNSEL

OTHER	DbNY

x x x
x x
EXlUBltFS SUBMITTED TOtift BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVI EW OF DISCl lA RGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  l:lRlEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL A PPEARA NCE
TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  I !EARI NG

HEARING llATE	CASE NUMflEK

01 Dec 2009

FD-2008-00472

OARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE,

Case heard in Washington, O,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 appl icant at the applicant's request.

TO;

SAF/M R BR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00472	

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 and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

The attached brief contai ns 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:

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because he only made one mistake and his discharge was too harsh.  The records indicated the applicant had a Special Court Martial for being absent without leave for 37 days and possession of marijuana.  He was punished with confi nement for six months, forfeiture of pay for 6 months, and red uction in grade to Airman Basic.  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.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requi rements of the discharge regulation and was withi n 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