AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
! NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRAOI'

X	RECORD  REVIEW

ADOl! :ss ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

x

MEMBER SITTING

A93. 17 A92.35

A66.00

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT Tl ME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

liEARING DATE	CASE Nl'MllER

19 Ma r 2010

FD-2009-00010

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 appl icant's request.

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUlTI:: 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE A!R FORCE PERSONN'l. COUNCIL
AIR FORCE D!SCHARG£ 11.ll:VIEW BOARD
15.15 COMMAND  DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANllRF.WS AFB, MD l0762-7UOJ

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	IEF-V2)	Previ ous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2009-00010	

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 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 wou]d justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

The record indicates that the appl icant was discharged for Misconduct-Drug Abuse. He  received nonjudicial punishment in March 2007 for ·wrongful use of ecstasy, in violation of Article l 12a, UCMJ and dereliction of duty, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. The applicant acknowledges his misconduct by stating that he "had a excellent career and only had one incident were lsic] J had did wrong." After review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that he was unaware of the Air Force policy   zero tolerance to drug use.  The Board found the negative aspects of the w111ful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of the applicant's performance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.

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 detennines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Exami ner's Brief