AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

TYPE	PERSONAL   APPEARANCE  .
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE

AB
x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

YES	No
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

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

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF

29 Oct 2003

FD-2003-00200

PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE

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

TO:

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

FROM:

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

FD2003-00200	

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

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 is denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues.  Applicant was discharged for a pattern of misconduct and drug abuse (marijuana), for which member received at least two Articles 15, a Letter of Reprimand, an Unfavorable Information File, and was placed on the Control Roster.  Although the discharge documents are not available for review, a copy of member's Special Security File, and review of an Air Force Office of Special Investigations Report of Investigation confirmed member's misconduct and drug abuse.  These records disclosed member had a civilian arrest for driving under the influence. Member's drug use was revealed through a random urinalysis returned positive for 97 nanograms of tetrahydrocannabinol,  well above the Department of Defense cutoff  of 15 nanograms.  Three witness statements corroborated this drug abuse. Additionally, member provided alcoholic beverages to underage individuals, had alcoholic beverages in the dormitory, and failed to remain in his dormitory during curfew hours, per one of his Articles 15. Lacking any evidence from the applicant  to the contrary, the Board relied on the presumption of regularity and found no wrongful action by the Air Force.  At the time of the discharge, the Air Force's drug policy was well publicized and members were continually made aware that illegal drug use was not tolerated.  Marijuana use is viewed as a very serious failure to meet Air Force standards.  The Board noted that because drug abuse is not compatible with Air
Force standards, the characterization of service member received is warranted; the discharge was proper and without basis for upgrade.  The Board also noted that member was age 24 to 25 when his offenses occurred, the same age as other airmen who adhere to standards. He was counseled repeatedly in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies.  In spite of those rehabilitative efforts, he was unwilling or unable to improve his behavior.  The Board concluded applicant knew right from wrong and was responsible for his actions, and therefore was held accountable for them.  No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

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	

.-