Am FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

TYPE	x	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
••••n
RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

YES
x

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY
x x x x

ISSUES	A94.05	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
21 Nov 2003	CASE NUMBER
FD-2003-00410		ADDITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	

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 781504742

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

FD-2003-00410	

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

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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 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: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for possessing marijuana. 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 applicant states that he was falsely accused and that his military records were outstanding prior to this accusation. The OSI report has statements from witnesses who stated the applicant passed the marijuana cigar around. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons that were the basis for this case. Applicant stated he was initially charged with the use of marijuana and when the urinalysis came back negative, the charges were dropped and he received new charges. This is correct. The applicant was initially charged with using marijuana and when the results of the urinalysis came back negative, he was only charged with possession. It is also noted that the applicant was a Security Policeman and should have known better than to associate himself with individuals who were smoking marijuana.

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