-

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X PERSONAL APPEARANCE	RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANlZATION OF COUNSJ<J,
Y!S	NO	DISABLED AMERICAN  VETERANS
x

VOTE OF THE llOARD
MEMBERS SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTllC

OTJJER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

.XfDJU'.ra SlJlll\flTTED TO TJI& BOARD

A93.01, A93.09, A92.21

A66.00	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
J	LEITER Of NOTIFICATION

HEARIN(; DATE
03-04-10

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0360

4	BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDmONAL EXHIBITS SUBMIITED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATJONAL' D!SruSSED ON Tim ATTACHED Al1l FORCE DISOIARGE R V)J>W BOARl:J Dl!ISIONAL RATIONALE.

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MIBR
s59 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOL.PU AFB, TX 78150-4742

AFHQ !<'ORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AJR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 31tD FLOOR ANDREWS  AFB,  MD 20762-7002
Previous edition will be used.

/
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0360	
GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for U,Pgrade of discharge to Honorable and to change the reason and authority for discharge.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel at Andrews AFB, MD on April  10, 2003.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit 6:  Character Letter from Spouse dated April 9, 2003
Exhibit 7:  Eight Character Letters from Co-Workers and Supervisors
Exhibit 8: Notarized PlanetGov Corporation Top Secret Clearance Certification dated April 7, 2003 Exhibit 9:  Negative Drug Screen Results dated April 7, 2003
Exhibit 10: Cisco Certified Network Professional Certificate

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. The applicant's issues are also listed in the attached brief.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge and change of reason for the discharge are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues.  Applicant infers discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh based on isolated experimental behavior that was out of character for him.  Applicant further highlighted that he was suffering from dysthymia, which could have negatively impacted his judgment,  although he conceded he still knew right from wrong.  He also notes his performance was otherwise excellent and he continued to be a hard worker even after his misconduct came to light.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for drug abuse.  Specifically he used marijuana twice over a short period, as attested to in a signed sworn witness statement provided to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations, and when member also subsequently admitted under oath and in a signed sworn statement that he had used it twice.  At the time of his discharge, member consulted counsel and submitted statements in his own behalf requesting an honorable separation. Applicant does not deny his illegal drug use and possession, but attributes his misconduct to youth, immaturity, and a lapse in judgment, possibly resulting from his depression.  He admitted to using the drugs on base in his dormitory, and to purchasing illegal drugs to provide to another military member.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and the seriousness of drug abuse outweighs his otherwise satisfactory service.  Furthermore, member knew illegal drug use was incompatible with Air Force standards, but chose to ignore those standards.  The Board found the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.

Applicant also noted that his post-service character has improved, and he feels that now warrants an honorable characterization of service, and that he shouldn't have to continue to pay for his past mistakes forever.  He noted he has been gainfully employed and pursuing more education, as well as having gotten married.  Nevertheless, applicant's successes since his separation are not relevant to the period of service under review, are insufficient grounds to overcome the factors leading to his discharge, and do not provide a basis for an upgrade.

CONCLUSIONS:  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 that 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 the discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief