AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN
SSGT	•1112 IS
X	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

L-••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x x x
x x

ISSUES

A92.35 A92.21 A92.37

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

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

27 Feb 2004	FD-2003-00509

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.

-----------------	--,,.--	-.L'J.....Jil-	-----------------------	----"'---------------------

TO:

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

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

FD2003-00509	

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 that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an impropriety or inequity that would justify an upgrade of the discharge.

Issue 1.  Applicant was discharged for commission of a serious offense, namely drug abuse, and contends he was punished too severely.  During the enlistment under review, member received an Article  15 for wrongful use of marijuana when a probable cause urinalysis came back containing THC above the DoD
cut-off of 15 ng/ml. Additionally, applicant's drug abuse was documented in witness statements and an Air Force Office of Special Investigations Report of Investigation. Member was recommended for an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge and submitted a conditional waiver to his right to an administrative board hearing in exchange for a general (under honorable conditions) service characterization.  The Board recognized applicant had over 11 years of at the time of his discharge, but also noted              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, particularly for a noncommissioned officer with the rank and tenure applicant had. The Board noted that because drug abuse is not compatible with Air Force standards, the characterization of service he received is warranted and appropriate due to that misconduct. The Board could find no inequity or impropriety on which to suggest a basis to upgrade the discharge.

Issue 2.  Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely due to the adverse nature of his discharge.  The DRB recognized the applicant was over 31 years of age when the discharge took place and the negative impact it may have had on him.  The Board noted applicant was older than the vast majority of members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct, and concluded that the characterization  of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the serious misconduct. And while the Board commends applicant for his desire to acquire better employment, this is a not a matter of equity or propriety that provides a basis for 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