AI R FORCE DISC H ARGE REVI EW BOARD HEARI NG RECORD

: - - -	- --- - ;(LAST, FIRST MIDDU:INITl_A_L)_	.	--+__R__D-E----	_L·: :-.-.._] TYPE UOTH		I	PERSON AL APPEA RANCE			x	I	RECORD REV IEW
11"·;\"?'".-.-i;;:-:;;-yo[\!  - +-NA-M_ k_: -01f. COii NSEL AND OR ORGAN llAl'ION

YES	I	No
I x

ADDRESS AN() OK ORGANIZATION  OF COl' NSEL

MEMBER SITTING

x x x x
x

ISSllES

AOl.13 A94.05

I NDEX  N UMttRR

A66.00

EXHIBITS SUBMITTED T()THE BOARD
ORDER APPOINTING THL BOARD ·--------
2	APPLICATION FOR REVI EW OF DISC! IA RGE

3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4		BRIEF or PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
A DDITIONAL EXI l l BITS SUBM ITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HE

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

26 Jan 2007	FD-2005-00416

R,	RATIONALE        •• •

··.··

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the A FBCMR

Names and votes wi ll be made avail able to the appl icant at the appl icant's req uest.

.-----0_________________!.)_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,
'	-

·:·iz!f007

' ---- ,.;.¥;;/-::;:,:----:--------------·:.----;;;	mt -----.-- r - ----·ry :----:..------ .:...::------- -; .

SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH A FA, TX 781 50-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR  FORCE  PEKSONNEI. COUNCIL All< FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD
1333 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 2076Z·700Z

'--- ----	------	---- -- _]_- ----- ----	--- -- ------ . .

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)

Previous edition wi ll be used

CASE NUMBER

FD-2005-00416

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE

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 received a UOTHC for Misconduct--Drug Abuse.

ISSUE 1: Applicant contends that his discharge was too harsh for a one time use of marijuana and does not meet the standard for UOTHC per AFI 36-3208, para 1.18.3. The records indicate the applicant received two Article l 5s for: 1) failing to report for duty and incapacitation of performance of duties because of overindulgence of intoxicating beverages and 2) the wrongful use marijuana. The records indicate that the member started on ADAPT but did not complete the program. Records show the commander's recommendation for a UOTHC discharge was made based on behavior which, "constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of airmen" (AFJ 36-3208, para 1.18.3). The records also show that the member was offered an administrative discharge board but waived his right to a hearing. After review of the record, the Board found no inequity or impropriety with the original decision and finds the characterization of the discharge to be appropriate.

ISSUE 2: Applicant contends that the facts don't support the discharge. lte contends that the only evidence against him was a positive urinalysis result which had to be retested. He contends that his sample was never run again but only a readjustment of the computer which resulted in a positive for THC in his urine. He states the results are inconclusive and should be inadmissible. Records indicate that member tested positive for THC at 62ng, four times above the DoD standard. His sample was reprocessed because the machine integrated the smaller peak level in the sample vice the large peak it's supposed to process, causing skewed results. The sample was reprocessed the following day with a repeat positive result. The member submitted a statement on his behalf but did not appeal. 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.

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