NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
1 1	1,881	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN	
TYPE	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	RECORD  REVIEW	
NAME OF COVNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
  YES	No 	
x	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL	

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

MEMBER SITTING

x x x x

ISSUES	A67.30, A92.3S

INDEX NUMBER	A67.30

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
3	
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF

24 Oct 2003

FD2002-0544

PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

Case heard at Albany, New York

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and his right to request a personal appearance.

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

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0544	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was scheduled for a personal appearance at Albany, New York on 24 October 2003, but on 15 September 2003 cancelled his appearance and requested a non-personal appearance.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor the evidence provided by the applicant substantiates and inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge characterization.

ISSUE:

Applicant was discharged for the commission of  a serious offense. According to an AFOSI report of investigation, the applicant wrongfully possessed 131.39 grams of marijuana, sold marijuana to high school students, sold marijuana at his off-base residence, and possessed drug paraphernalia. At the time of his discharge, his case had not been heard in civilian court. The applicant first requested his case be heard by an administrative discharge board, but later unconditionally waived his right to  an administrative discharge board. He did not submit matters on his own behalf at the time of his unconditional waiver. He contends his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident during his enlistment. He stated that there is no excuse for his actions and submits that family financial needs placed a great deal of pressure on him. He stated that he regrets his illegal behavior and contends that the OSI report is misleading. At the time his discharge was initiated, he was given extracts of the AFOSI report as well as other evidence supporting his discharge. He wishes the Air Force had waited to discharge him until after his court appearance. There is no requirement, however, for the Air Force to do so. Furthermore, the Air Force did not discharge him for a civilian conviction; rather it chose to separate him for the underlying misconduct. The Board noted that wrongful involvement with illegal drugs is incompatible with Air Force standards and that the seriousness of the applicant's misconduct outweighed his otherwise  satisfactory  service. Additionally, the Board applied the presumption of regularity in deciding that the discharge action and characterization were appropriate. A preponderance of the evidence supports the discharge action and characterization.

CONCLUSIONS: The Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the separation 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 characterization of the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief