AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD HEARING RECORD
_,f----------------------------- ---------- ------------J

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

AFSN/SSAN

AIC

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

GEN	UOTHC
x x x x x

SSUES

AOl.13 A87.00 A94.29

INDEX NUMBER

A75.00

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
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

---1------------------f--+----·-· ----·
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

21 Oct 2004

FD-2003-00218

Case heard at Washington, D.C and Travis AFB, CA via video teleconferencing.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR

..-----  ....····'·......../.\  ............................·····........................................................-......-------1

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 WH>o"G, 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 NUJ\'IBER

FD-2003-00218	

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

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB, MD via video teleconference from Travis AFB, CA on October 21, 2004.

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 that provided  by the applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE:

Issue 1. Applicant contended that his discharge was inequitable because no evidence of a crime was presented to any authorities.  The Board found, consistent with the applicant's admissions to AFOSI, that the applicant had purchased and possessed ecstasy on multiple occasions; had inhaled a hazardous substance, failed to obey an order not to drive on Fort Stewart, Georgia, and concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members.  In addition, the Board had evidence from the AFOSI report that the applicant had used ecstasy but did not rely on it in reaching its determination due to
the testimony of the applicant denying use and his testimony that the witnesses who indicated his use recanted their statements.  Nonetheless, the characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

Issue 2.  Applicant stated that his discharge was unfair.  The Board found, however, that there was evidence to support the criminal charges and the applicant had twice voluntarily requested a discharge in lieu of court­ martial under advisement by legal counsel and was fully aware that such discharge could lead to an under other than honorable conditions discharge.

Issue 3.  Applicant also stated that the type of discharge was inappropriately suited to his character.  The Board determined, however, that the type of discharge was an appropriate reflection of the applicant's military record of service.

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