x•
X* X"
X"
x•

A90.06, A02.08, A02.IO	67.70	1  ORDER APPOINTING TilE BOARD
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

KtARJNG DA.TB
010111

G\SENUMBER
FD00-00143

2
3	LETTER  OF f\IOTJF!CATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSOl\"NEL FILE

t

COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITSSUBMITTEDAT TIME OF
PERSONALAPPEARANCE

"C"as"e"h"eard at Andre\\-'S AFB,  1\1.D.
* Change the reason for discharge to: Secretarial Authority.  SPD: JFF

.\d\'ise applicant of the decision of the Board.

···----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··-	------ ··----- ··i-	--<

SAF/M!BR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781 50-4742

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JA N 00

(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIE\V BOARD 1535COMMANDDR, EE WING, 3-.0 FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Pre\·iousedition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD00-00143	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable and change ofreason for discharge.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) with counsel
at Washington, D.C. on I !January 200 1. For the record, W	2	e-rom the )    iiJJ  JUI
represented the applicant.

The following additional witnesses appeared on behalf of the applicant:

former military supervisor of applicant at the time of discharge
, who served with and currently works with and supervises the applicant. CMSGT(ret), Shop Chiefof applicant at the time of discharge.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:

Exhibit 6-20 Certificates of Training, Letters, civilian drug test reports, and other assorted documents. FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge and change ofreason for discharge are granted.
The board finds that evidence ofrecord as well as evidence and testimony provided by the applicant and witnesses at the hearing substantiated an inequity in the discharge process, whichjustifies an upgrade of discharge.

The applicant'sissues are listed in the attached brief.

Issues 1. The appl icant contended that he was unfairly denied an Administrative Discharge Board (ADB). The board found that the applicant had applied for an ADB and communicated his intention verbally to appear before such board while preparing the formal request documents and evidence. The member even extended his period of enlistment, which would have ended, allowing more time to prepare for and appear before the ADB. The command received his written request for an ADB through the mail with a postmark only one day past the  14-daylimit for notification and based on this technicality, denied the ADB and proceeded with administrative discharge. Witnesses present for the applicant testified they were prepared to appear before the ADB on behalf of the applicant and would have provided credible testimony to negate the
;harge of drug abuse. The witnesses for the applicant testifying before this board stated that they knew that
:he applicant intended to fight the charge of drug abuse and that he had compiled evidence to show that the
,'positive"drug test for methamphetarnine was the result of use of a legitimately prescribed medication he was taking for weight control. The discharge authority chose to ignore the Medical Review Officer's notation in the applicant'shealth record that the applicant was on an appetite-suppressing  prescription
:!rug, an amphetamine derivative, which had been legally and appropriately prescribed by a civilian Jhysician, and therefore the test result should be reported as."Negative". The applicant was provided legal
;ounsel by long distance telephone for a few brief conferences and the counsel did not have access to or 'xamine the documents to be used as evidence.

ZONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was not consistent with the Jrocedural and substantiverequirements of the discharge regulation and although within the discretion of
.he discharge authority, the applicant was not provided full administrative due process.	

In view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists an equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should be changed to Honorable and the reason for discharge changed to SecretarialAuthority.  The board considered a change of the re-enlistment (RE) code and declined to change this since the member had not requested such change.  On June  19,having received a request for a change in the RE code from the applicant, the board reconvened for further deliberations and voted unanimously not to change the RE code.

Attachment:
Examiner,s Brief