AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

,  NAME OF SERVICE :>IDIBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSl'i/SSAN

7

TYPE GEN

YES	No
x

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
:'liAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATlON

AB
x	RECORD  REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF COllNSEL

MEMBER  SITTING

HON	GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

ISSUES

A92.35 A92.21 A93.0I

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

I	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

HEARJ:'llG  DATE	CASE NUMBER

15 Sep 2004	FD-2004-00211

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 78I 50-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
Aut FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 C01'-L"1A:"iD DR, EE WIJliG, 3RD FLOOR A!'i"DRE\VS 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 NUI\1BER

FD-2004-00211

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change his reenlistment code.

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,  change  of  reason   and  authority   for  discharge,   and  change  of reenlistment  code are 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 I .  Applicant was discharged for drug abuse.  Member received an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana when a unit inspection urinalysis came back containing THC well above the DoD cut-off of 15 ng/ml, specifically 44 ng/ml.  Applicant feels a general discharge was too harsh for this offense, which he described as "isolated."  Although not the basis for discharge, the Board noted the record documented other incidents of misconduct including being late to work on multiple occasions, having unauthorized knives in the dormitory, and disrespect to a noncommissioned  officer.  As a result of these incidents, member had received three Letters of Counseling and three Letters of Reprimand.  Although at the time of the discharge, member requested a retention waiver, it was not granted in view of this history of other derogatory information.  Additionally, the Board 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 and thus the characterization of service member 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.  The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as justification for upgrade.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact the loss of these benefits was having on the applicant, but this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.

Issue 3 applies to the applicant's post-service activities.  The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well, has had a good job, and is now pursuing further education.  However, this does not provide a basis of inequity or impropriety in his discharge, and none was suggested or found in the course of the record review.  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