AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

TYPE
GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEi. AND OR ORGANIZATION

•	di •••.,.

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

NO
x

MEMBERS SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -.------------+-----+------+------+------!x--- ,
x x x
x

---------------------------------------------- '
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER
A93.07, A93.09, A92.37	A66.00

I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE
03-05-16

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00012

4	BRIEF 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 appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

SAF/MIBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH 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 NUMBER

FD2003-00012	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade  of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

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

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge, change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

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

Issues. Applicant was discharged for misconduct, drug abuse. Member submitted to a random urinalysis that was found to contain THC in excess of the DoD cut-off of 15 ng/ml. Member received an Article 15 for this offense. At the time of his discharge member submitted a statement in his own behalf professing his innocence but noting the futility of disputing the drug testing procedure or results. He said he was unwilling to risk a possible court martial conviction, and did not wish to be retained because he wanted to get on with his life. Member requested an honorable discharge. Applicant now infers he committed the offense by stating he was "100 miles away from my duty station out in the country (unavailable) when I experimented with marijuana." Applicant feels his potential future employment options should not continue to be jeopardized due to this isolated incident. Because the member received an administrative discharge, not a punitive discharge, the Board must find an inequity or impropriety on which to base an upgrade; clemency is not available as a reason for upgrading an administrative discharge.  The Board noted that drug abuse is not compatible with Air Force standards; the seriousness of that misconduct outweighed the applicant's otherwise satisfactory service. The Air Force's drug policy was well publicized and all members were continually made aware that illegal drug use was not tolerated. The Board finds the discharge proper.

The applicant cited his desire to return to military service. While the Board commends applicant on this desire, and is sympathetic to the impact a General discharge has on his reenlistment code, this is not a matter of equity or propriety that warrants 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 discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief