AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SER'•ICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

AB	
x	RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY

...............................•.....	-------------t-----t-----+-----j-----+------j
x x x x x

ISSUES

A94.53 A94.39 A92.37

INDEX NUMBER

A66.llll

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
1	
HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF

05 Nov 2003

FD-2003-00313

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

.---- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··----- ··----J ------- ··----- ··----- ··-------------- ··----- ··----:., 	

TO:

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

FROM:

SECRETARY OF THI 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

FD2003-003l3	

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.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for misconduct, drug abuse. An Air Force Office  of  Special Investigations Report of Investigation documented member's alleged involvement with various drugs, witnessed by at least three different people, on up to 12 separate occasions. As part of the investigation, a positive consensual urinalysis in June 2001 disclosed the presence of marijuana, for which member pied guilty and was found guilty by Special Court Martial but did not receive a punitive  discharge. Member testified under oath at court and admitted in a Stipulation of Fact that he did use  marijuana  on three occasions in October and November 2000, and June 2001. Member requested discharge in lieu of court martial conditioned on receipt of a general (under  honorable  conditions)  discharge.  That  request  was denied. Member also entered into a Pre-Trial Agreement in which he agreed to plead guilty to the charge noted above if certain other drug-related charges against him were dismissed. This request was granted. At the time of the administrative discharge processing, member failed to submit statements in his own behalf. The record review also disclosed member entered the military  on a moral  waiver  due to a pre-service curfew violation, shoplifting, and resisting arrest. Additionally, his  enlistment  documents  disclosed admitted pre-service marijuana use on five occasions during a 22-month period. With regard to the in­ service drug use, the Board noted that the Air Force's drug policy was well publicized and members were continually made aware that illegal drug use was not tolerated. Drug abuse is a particularly  serious failure to meet Air Force standards that does not warrant an honorable characterization  of service.  The Board could find no inequity or impropriety on which to base an upgrade to 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