AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST M IDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

•

GRADE

X  RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBERS  SITTING	GEN	OTHER	DENY

COL JOSEPH M. MARCHINO II

COL HORACE R. CARSON COL THOMAS. E. HAMMEN LT COL R. GAYLE FULTS
MAJOR CHRISTOPHER C. VANNATTA

x x x x x

lSSIJl\S

INDEX  NUMBER

EXHIBITS SUBMITIEII TO Tlf ; 1.!l:!"ail'

A94.0S

A66.00	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTTFICATION

HEARING DATE
1MAY 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0492

BRlEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appeara nce with/without counsel, and the right to
submit an application to the AFBCMR.

Sl	c!J-

SIGNATURE OF RECORDER

	

SAF/MIBR
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

FD02-0492	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason and Authority for discharge and change the RE Code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

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

FINDINGS:  Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends that his discharge was too harsh because he wasn't on duty and was at a keg party and was caught. He believes that this was not a severe incident to warrant a discharge. The record indicates the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongfully using marijuana. Drug abuse is incompatible with military service and airmen who abuse drugs one or more times are subject to discharge for misconduct. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in drug abuse seriously impairs accomplishing the military mission. The applicant was not eligible for probation and rehabilitation due to the fact that he used marijuana on two separate occasions and admitted to pre-service use of marijuana five (5) times. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. The Board found no evidence of any inequity or impropriety on which to base a decision to upgrade the discharge.

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

Attachment: Examiner's Brief