AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

GRADE

AB
x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x
x x x x

ISSUES

A92.21

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 APPEARANCE

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

18 Aug 2004	FD-2004-00180

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.

-------------------	------- ---------------	---------------'------------------------------------------   ''
'

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, lRD 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-2004-00180	

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 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.

Issue 1. Applicant received an under other than honorable conditions discharge for misconduct. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for disrespect to a noncommissioned officer in the execution of his duties, and pursuant to his guilty pleas, was convicted by Summary Court Martial of wrongful methamphetamine use. Although the administrative discharge package was unavailable to the Board for review, some of the court martial documents were. They revealed that member admitted his illegal drug use in a Stipulation of Fact, describing the circumstances by which he came to use it and knowing that it was illegal. He was subsequently caught by a random urinalysis that came back at a level of 2994 ng/ml compared to the cut-off of 500 ng/ml. Member did not dispute the drug test procedures or result, and continues to admit his wrongdoing and accept full responsibility. Additionally, member entered into a Pre Trial Agreement whereby he waived his rights to a trial and acknowledged he could be administratively discharged under other than honorable conditions, and if the government chose to do so, he waived his right for the administrative discharge to be heard by a board. Because the member did receive an administrative discharge, not a punitive discharge, the Board must find an inequity or impropriety on which to base an upgrade; clemency is not available as a reason for upgrading an administrative discharge. The Board noted that drug abuse constitutes serious misconduct that is not compatible with Air Force standards. The Air Force's drug policy was and is well publicized and all members are continually made aware that illegal drug use is not tolerated. 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.

Issue 2 applies to the applicant's post-service activities. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  However, this does not reflect on his period of service or provide a basis in inequity or impropriety which warrants an upgrade. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct appropriately characterized his term 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