AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
TYPE GEN. | PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW
AFSN/SSAN
3] NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
QRTHE BOARD”
GEN UOTHC | OTHER DENY _
MEMBER SITTING Son
A66.00
ISSUES A93.17 INDEX NUMBER
A92.35 Lt eee
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 - ~ ~
19 Mar 2010 FD-2009-00010
APPLICANT S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S RA
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 APBCMR.
Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant’s request.
SAF/MRBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
nen eo oT epi AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous
CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 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 would justify a change of discharge.
ISSUE:
The record indicates that the applicant was discharged for Misconduct—Drug Abuse. He received
nonjudicial punishment in March 2007 for wrongful use of ecstasy, in violation of Article 112a, 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 |sic] | 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 of zero tolerance to drug use. The Board found the negative aspects of
the willful 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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged.
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00064
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 Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge. Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00063
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. After a review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in his 23 months of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use. The Board noted the issue was common result of miscommunication, at the time of discharge,...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00028
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL : : : AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFR, MD 20762-7001 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE- FD-2009-00028 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code. After a...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00250
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN AIC TYPE GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL VOTE OF THE BOARD MEMBER SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY x x x Xx x ISSUES A92.35 INDEX NUMBER A66.00 / : EXHIBITS SUB 1. |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 4 |BRIEF OF PERSONNEL...
AF | DRB | CY2009 | FD2008-00198
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD GRADE AFSN/SSAN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE xX RECORD REVIEW : .| NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL Rev Louis Christian Base Counseling 00 VOTE OF THE BOARD. [a ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE b/w lire COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00115
FILE COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD PERSONAL APPEARANCE ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF ISSUES A93.01 INDEX NUMBER A93.01 A67.03 A00.29 HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER ° 24 Jun 2010 FD-2009-00115 Case heard in Washington, D.C. application to the AFBCMR. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant’s discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00466
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN AIC Pt TYPE | PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME. 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 Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2008-00403
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. FINDING: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. After a review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in her three years of service she was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use.
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00049
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN TYPE GEN | PERSONAL APPEARANCE x RECORD REVIEW COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ~ , ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL ~ | " ONGTE OF THE BOARD = ed Lai sae ae fs ay HON GEN | UOTHC OTHER DENY x x x ISSUES A93.23 INDEX NUMBER A67.90 “EXBIBITS SUBMIT EED TO THE BOARD A92,35 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD _ A94.05 2_ [APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 |LETTER OF...
AF | DRB | CY2010 | FD-2009-00184
The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed bascd on the available service record. FINDINGS: The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 and two Letters of Reprimand for misconduct.