AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

AFSN/SSAN

•TY•PE

I 11 1	D	•••1t
X

RECORD REVIEW

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANI:IATJON	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZA.TION OF COUNSEL

X*+ X*+ X*+ X*+ X*+
INDEX NUMBER
A66.00	1
.2	PPI !CATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER .OF NOTIFICATION

'MRINGDATE
' NOV 02

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0ll3

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

.....;..1

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIMIJ.: -- PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEA

AIR FORCE

*Change Reason and Authority to Secretaria.i Auli1v. ;i:/.

+ Change Reenlistment Code.

Case heard at Dobbins ARB, Georgia.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANOOU'H AFB, TX 78150-4742

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE Nll M BER

FD2002-0ll3	
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, and during the hearing also requested his reenlistment code be changed.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel  at Dobbins ARB, GA on November 21, 2002. The  following  witnesses  also  testified  on  the  applicant's behalf:	· applicant 's parents.

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: The Board grants the reJief requested.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.  However, based upon applicant's testimony and the record,  the Board finds the applicant's character of service and reason for discharge are inequitable.

The applicant's issues are listed in the attached brief.

Issues.  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh based on a one-time isolated incident  The records indicated the app1icant received an Article 15 for drug abuse.  Specifically he admitted in a signed sworn statement to the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) that he had used it once.  At the time of his discharge, member requested to be retained.  During the Discharge Review Board interview, applicant attributed his misconduct to immaturity and a lapse in judgment,  admitting he had made a mistake.  He further denied any other drug use before, during, or after his period of mi1itary service.  The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members, and did not condone the seriousness of member's drug abuse, particularly since he knew illegal drug use was incompatible with Air Force standards, but chose to ignore those standards.  However, the Board found the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was too harsh in the absence of other documented disciplinary infractions.  While the legal reviews noted that the unit commander did  not feel member met the stringent retention criteria, and cited "countless questions regarding his judgment and suitability for a miJitary career'' based on consistently missed appointments, questionable financial decisions, and a one-time weight and body fat measurement failure, the discharge record contained no documentary evidence of these alleged other infractions.  In the absence of such information, the Board found the discharge too harsh.

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 fu11 administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority.   The applicant's characterization of service and reason for discharge should be changed to Honorable and Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title I 0, USC  1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief