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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

1  GRADE 

I  AFSNISSAN 

'

YES 

I 

-

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

 

NAME O F  COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION 

, 

No 
X 

I 

I 

1 
1  ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  O F  COUNSEL 

RECORDREVIEW 

MEMBER SITTING 

HON 

GEN 

UOTHC 

I  OTHER 

DENY 

VOTE OF THE BOARD 

ISSUES  A92.21 

I  INDEX NUMBER 

A94.07 

HEARING DATE 7 
1  18 Oct 2004 

I  FD-2002-0423 

I 

1 
2 
3 
4 

1 

I 

I 

I 

I 

EXHIBITS SUBMITFEE%O THE BOAgD 

I 

ORDER APPQMTING THE BOARD 
APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 
LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 
BRlEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD 
ADDITIONAL  EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

.APPLICANT'S ISSLT AM) THE BOARD'S  DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON T I E  ATTACIED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE RbVIEW BOARD DEClSl0N.U  RATIONALE 

Case heard at Washington, D.C. via video teleconference from Travis AFB, CA. 

I Advise applicant of the decision of the Board  and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR. 

C-..-..-..-..-..-..-----F--------------------------------------------------------------------------------: 

T O  

SAFIMRBR 
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78 150-4742 

INDO- 

FROM: 

SECRETARY OF THE A I R  FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW  BOARD 
1535 COMMAND DR.  EE WING. 3RD FLOOR 
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002 

DATE  10n8~20,04 

- 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will be used 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

CASE NUhIBER 

FD-2002-0423 

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

The  applicant appeared before  the Discharge  Review Board  (DRB) at Andrews  AFB, Maryland,  via  video 
teleconference (VTC) from Travis AFB, California.  Although she acknowledged her right to be represented 
d her right to counsel.  The applicant presented  personal testimony and called 
by counsel, the ap 
one witness, Major 
?  USAFR.  Both testified under oath. 

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. 

ISSUES: 

1.  Applicant  contends  the  discharge  was  inequitable because  she made  a mistake  more  than  17 years  ago 
and the discharge is keeping her from joining  the Air Force Reserve.  The records indicated the applicant, a 
noncommissioned officer, was facing a special court-martial  stemming from her wrongful use of marijuana. 
Prior to trial, the applicant submitted a request for discharge in lieu of court-martial  pursuant to Chapter 4 of 
Air Force Regulation 39-10.  In her "Chapter  4"  request,  she acknowledges that if her request was approved, 
she could  be  separated  under  other than honorable  conditions  (UOTHC).  She further  stated that  she was 
aware  of  the  adverse  nature  of  such  a  service  characterization.  She  made  her  request  after  consulting 
military defense  counsel.  During her VTC, the applicant admitted to wrongfully using  marijuana  while she 
was in Frankfurt, Germany, in June or July of  1987.  After returning to her duty section, she was ordered to 
submit  a urine  sample as part  of a random  urinalysis  inspection.  Her  sample tested  positive for THC, the 
metabolite in marijuana, at 50 nanograms per milliliter  (nglml).  The DOD cutoff for marijuana is  15 nglml. 
The applicant  further  admitted to both pre-service and post-service marijuana use, but testified  that she has 
not  used  illegal  drugs  for  more  than  15  years.  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,  no  inequity  or  impropriety  in  her  discharge  was  suggested or 
found in the course of the hearing.  The Board  concluded the UOTHC discharge appropriately characterized 
her term of service. 

CONCLUSIONS:  The  Discharge  Review  Board  concludes  that  the  discharge  was  consistent  with  the 
procedural  and  substantive  requirements  of  the  discharge  regulation,  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 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 

AIR  FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD 

ANDREWS AFB,  MD 

(Former SSGT)  (HGH SSGT) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd a UOTH Disch fr USAF 23 OCT 87 UP AFR 39-10, 
Chapter 4  (Discharge in Lieu of Trial by Court Martial).  Appeals for Honorable 
Discharge, to Change the RE Code, and to Change the Reason and Authority for 
Discharge. 

2.  BACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 14 Jun 60.  Enlmt Age: 20 0/12.  Disch Age: 27 4/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 

AFQT: N/A.  A-86,  E-48,  G-55,  M-22. PAFSC: 90770 -  Bioenvironmental 
Engineering Technician. DAS: 3 Apr 86. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 27 Jun 80 -  11 Nov 80 (4 months 15 days) (Inactive). 

(2) Enlisted as A1C 12 Nov 80 for 4 yrs.  Extended 7 Sep 82 
for 2 months.  Extended 1 Aug 84 for 6 months.  Svd: 4 yrs 7 months 29 days, all 
AMS.  SrA -  1 Oct 82.  Sgt -  1 Oct 83.  SrA -  13 Feb 84  (Vacation of NCO Status). 
Sgt -  30 Jul 84 (Reappointed to NCO Status).  APRs: 9,9,9,8. 

ART 15:  13 Feb 84, RAF  Bentwaters, England -  You did, on or about 

30 Jan 84, without authority, fail to at the time prescribed 
to your appointed place of duty, to wit: Building 523. 
Suspended reduction to AlC, forfeiture of $100.00 pay per 
month for one month.  (No appeal) (No mitigation) 

3.  SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Reenlisted as Sgt 12 Jul 85 for 4 yrs.  Extended 25 Nov 86 for 9 

months. Svd: 2 Yrs 3 Mo 11 Das, all AMS. 

b.  Grade Status:  SSgt -  1 Sep 86 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15's:  None. 

e.  Additional: None. 

f.  CM:  None. 

g.  Record of SV: 12 Nov 84 -  11 Nov 85  McClellan AFB  8  (Annual) 
12 Nov 85 -  11 Nov 86  Rhein Main AB  9  (Annual) 
12 Nov 86 -  08 Aug 87  Rhein Main AB  9  (CRO) 

(Discharged from Charleston AFB) 

h.  Awards &  Decs:  AFTR, AFGCM, AFSAEMR, AFOSLTR ~ / 1  OLC, AFLSAR, AFOUA. 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS: (7) Yrs  (3) Mos  (27) Das 

TAMS: (6) Yrs  (11) Mos  (12) Das 

4.  BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 18 Sep 02. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable, Change the RE Code, and Change the Reason 

and Authority for Discharge) 

ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF. 

ATCH 
1. Applicant's Issues. 
2. Letter of Recommendation. 
3. Character Reference. 
4. Memorandum For Air Force Discharge Review Board. 
5. Airman Performance Reports. 

n 

CHARGE SHEET 

I. PERSONAL DATA 

Rhei n-Mai n  USAF  C l i n i c  
UNITED  STATES  A I R   FORCE 
7.  PAY PER M O N T H  

8. NATURE OF  RESTRAINT OF ACCUSED 

a.  BASIC 

b.  SEA/FOAEIGN  D U T Y  

c.  T O T A L  

I 

I 

NONE 

NONE 

e. 

INITIAL DATE 

12  J u l y  wc 4  Years  2 

b.  TERM 

9.  DATEIS) IMPOSED 

lo.  CHARGE: 

SPECIFICATION: 

VIOLATION  OF  THE  UCMJ.  ARTICLE 

i

i ~ a  

It.  CHARGES AND SPECIFICATIONS 

I n  t h a t   STAFF  SERGEANT 

Rhein-Main  USAF  C l i n i c .   did,  i n  the  E 
on  o r   about  14  J u l y   1987,  wrongfully  use-marijuana. 

Uni ted  States  A i r   Force, 
tween  on  or  about  14  June  1987  and 

6 

Ill. PREFERRAL 

thorize  by law to admin'  te;  oaths in  caws of  this character,  pelrondly  appeared the 
, 1 9 % ~ .  and signed the foregoing charges and rpecificationm 
under  oath that  h e / h  k a  penon  a b j e c t  to t  e  Uniform  Code of Military  Justice  and that heishe either har  p e r r o d  knowledge  02 

enigned, 
clay  of  +. 

t e n  m t  forth therein and that the rame are true to the best of hislher knowledge and belief. 

435 TAWIJA 

/ 

Chief, Military Justice 

Offlclal  Cqpoclty to Admfnlrter  Oath 

(See  P.C.M.  3 0 7 ( b ) m u r t  br  cornmluloned  0-1 

?z?!!Gm 

E D I T I O N  O f  OCT 00 IS OBSOLETE. 

27  August 

. 19 - ..the a c c s d  ru Informed  of  the  charges against himlher and  of  the  name(.)  of  I 

87 

or  H.C.M.  308  ( 0 ) ) .   ( ~ e ;  R.C.M. 308 if notification  cannot be  mode.) 

USAF  C l i n i c   Rhein-Main 

Or#anLation  of  lmmrdlote Commander 

(MAC) 

Dr*Ignatlon  of  Command or 

Rhein-Main  A i r   Base,  Germany 
Offlcrr E x m b l n #  Sum- 

CourfMartinl Jurhdktlon (See R.C.M. 403) 

148.  DESIGNATION OF COMMAND OF CONVENING AUTHORITY 

Hq  4 3 5 t h   T a c t i c a l   A i r l f i t   Wing  (MAC) 

b.  PLACE 
R h e i n - M a i n A i r B a s e , G E  

c.  DATE 

2 7 A u g u s t 1 9 8 7  

I Referred for trial to the  s p e c i a l  

t h i s   h e a d a u a r t e r s  

d a t e d  

24  August 

court-martial convened by  S p e c i a l   Order AA-17 

19 . 

8 7  

subject to the following i n s t r u c t i o ~ : ~  None 

I 

Bv  ORDER 

Command or Order 

of  THE  COMMANDER 

S t a f f   J u d g e   Advocate 

O M c M  Copoelty of  Officer Si#nln# 

&torl%i)  rewed a copy hereof on WL(Br64 the above named a c e d .  

C a p t a i n ,   USAF 

Orode or Rank  of  Trial Counrel 

.  . 

September 18,2002 

SAFIMIBR 
550-C Street West, Suite 40 
Randolph AFB, TX  78 150-4742 

h 

Re:  Review of Discharge 

Dear Review Board Members: 

Please consider the upgrade of my discharge to Honorable.  I am seeking this upgrade 
because I want to be a proud member of the Air Force Reserves. 

When I was discharged in October of 1987, I was discharged "Under Other Than 
Honorable Conditions" in lieu of trial by court martial.  I did not go to trial at the advice 
of the judge advocate who said that I could possibly do jail time and get a Bad Conduct 
discharge.  My crime was smoking marijuana. 

I am not writing this letter to accuse the military of unjust actions.  I was guilty as 
charged and I had to face the consequences of my actions.  What I am asking the military 
to do is to give me a SECOND CHANCE to be an honorable soldier for the United States 
of America.  I was not a drug user at the time of this incident.  I was an outstanding 
enlisted Staff' Sergeant in the Air Force Specialty Code of Bioenvironmental Engineering. 
I was headed for a wonderfd career and had intentions of being a career airman for at 
least 20 years.  I loved the military life and what the military represented.  I still am a 
staunch supporter of our military.  I simply made a big mistake. 

Fortunately, the Lord has kept me in His favor, and although He chastise those He loves, 
He is also a forgiving God.  What I am asking the military to do is forgive me and allow 
me an opportunity of redemption.  I want to serve my country again.  I realize that I could 
go to war should I be given this opportunity.  However, I love this coytry and I would 
serve in the Air Force with the spirit of excellence that the United States deserves of all 
its enlisted and officers. 

I am 42 years old.  I work for the Sacramento Utility District in the Radiation Protection 
Chemistry Department of the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generation Station.  I have continued 
my career in environmental compliance and occupational safety and health since I left the 
Air Force.  I am four classes away fiom a BA Degree in Industrial Technology of which I 
have pursued at Travis AFB in Fairfield, CA.  I am a minister at my church, the Center 
Of Praise, in Rancho Cordova, CA and will begin another degree program in Christian 
Leadership this fdl semester.  I have been drug fiee for over thirteen years and do not 
drink alcohol.  I am a leader with a mission to do good for God and my country. 

Please considei upgrading my discharge to Honorable so that I may be a soldier that the 
military would be proud o f  

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 
HEADQUARTERS SEVENTEENTH AIR  FORCE  (USAFE) 

APO  NEW YORK  0913@5002 

REPLY  TO 
ATTN  OF:  JA 

(Maj 

6103) 

SUBJECT:  Requ 
SSgt 

TO:  cc 

by  Court-Marti a1 , 
Rhein-Main  AB,  GE 

1.  I have  reviewed  t h e   attache 
court-martial  submi t t e d   by  SSgt 
S p e c i a l i s t ,   under  t h e   p r o v i s i o n s  o 
s u f f i c i e n t   t o   support  discharge.  A  l e g a l   review  by  435  TAW/JA 
the  f i l e  and  i s  hereby  adopted  and  incorporated by  reference. 

harge  i n  l i e u  o f   t r i a l   by 

a  Bioenvironmental 

, 

a p t e r   4,  and  f i n d   i t  l e g a l l y  
i s  contained  .in 

2. 
SSg 
14 

3. 

DISCUSSION: 

:  On  27  Aug  87,  a  charge  was  p r e f e r r e d  a l l e g i n g  
marijuana  on  one  occasion  betw'een  14  June  1987  and 

The  accused's  use  o f  marijuana  was  detected through  u r i n a l y s i s .   The 

evidence  i s  s u f f i c i e n t   t o  support  c o n v i c t i o n   f o r   the  charged  offense.  While  a 
serious  offense, 
there  i s  no  evidence  t h e   accused  used  t h e   drug  over  a  l o n g  
period  o f   time  o r   t h a t   she  used  any  more  potent  drug.  There  i s  no  evidence 
t h a t   she  used  t h e   drug  i n  the  presence  o f   other  i n d i v i d u a l s .   As  drug  abuse 
was  detected  by  u r i n a l y s i s ,   t h e   success  o f   the  case  i s  dependent  upon  t h e  
soundness  o f   the  sample's  c o l l e c t i o n   and  analysis.  Proving  proper  c o l l e c t i o n  
and  analysis  could  be  expensive  and  time  consuming.  Also, 
would  need  t o  f i n d  t h a t   the  accused  knowingly  used  t h e   drug,  and  proof  of  t h i s  
i s  made  more  d i f f i c h l  t by  the  f a c t   that, 
accused's  use,  and  second, 
accused's  m i l i t a r y   record,  w i t h   t h e   exception  o f   an  A r t i c l e   15  f o r   f a i l u r e   t o  
go  i n  1984, 
charges, 
t h a t   since  her  a r r i v a l   a t  Rhein-Main,  she  has  demonstrated  an  e x c e l l e n t  
a t t i t u d e   and  works  w e l l   w i t h o u t   supervision.  A1 though  c o n v i c t i o n   i s  1 i k e l y ,   a 
bad  conduct  discharge  i s  l e s s   c e r t a i n ,   given  the  nature  o f   t h e   offense  and  t h e  
accused's  good  m i l i t a r y   record.  The  ends  o f   j u s t i c e   are  n o t  compromised  by 
your  approval  o f   t h i s   discharge,  and  I recommend you  accept  t h e   accused's 
request. 

t h e   accused's  commander  c a l l  s  her  career  "very  p o s i t i v e "   and  notes 

t h e   accused  i s  1 i k e l y   t o   s t r o n g l y   deny  use.  The 

i s  f a i r   t o  excellent. 

I n  t h e   t r a n s m i t t a l   o f  court-martial 

f i r s t ,   no  witness  observed  t h e  

t h e   c o u r t  members 

CHARACTERIZATION OF SERVICE:  Normal ly,  discharges  i n  1 i e u   o f   tri a1  r e s u l  t 
4. 
i n  an  under  other  than  honorable  c o n d i t i o n s   (UOTHC)  discharge  (AFR  39-10,  para 
4-2). 
The  435 
discharge.  SSg 

d  USAF  Rhei n-Mai n  C l  i n i  c/CC  both  recommend  a  UOTHC 
has  received  two  APRs  d u r i n g  her  c u r r e n t   en1 i s t m e n t  

UNIT ED STATES AIR  FORCE 

SEPTEMBER 18,1947 

Right People.  Right Mission.  Right Now. 

which  began  i n  J u l y   1985.  Both  are  " f i r e w a l l "   9s.  You  may  n o t  consider  her 
A r t i c l e   15  i n  1984  f o r   purposes  o f   characterization.  Drug  abuse  by  an  NCO  i s  
a  very  serious  offense,  c o n s t i t u t i n g   a  s i g n i f i c a n t   departure  from  the  conduct 
expected  o f   airmen.  Her  offense,  even  considering  her  m i l i t a r y   record  i n  t h e  
c u r r e n t   enlistment,  warrants  a  UOTHC  discharge. 

5.  ERRORS  AND  IRREGULARITIES:  There  are  no  e r r o r s   o r   i r r e g u l a r i t i e s   i n  t h e  
case  f i l e  p r e j u d i c i a l   t o  t h e   accused. 

6 .   ACTIONS  WHICH  MAY  BE  TAKEN:  As  the  decision  a u t h o r i t y   you  have  t h e  
f o l l o w i n g   options: 

a.  Accept  t h i s   request  and  d i r e c t   t h a t   t h e   accused  be  discharged  from  t h e  

A i r   Force  w i t h   an  honorable,  general,  o r   an  under  o t h e r   than  honorable 
c o n d i t i o n s   discharge. 

b.  Reject  t h i s   request  f o r   discharge  i n  l i e u  o f  c o u r t - m a r t i a l   and  a l l o w  

t r i a l   by  c o u r t - m a r t i a l   t o  proceed  o r   issue  d i s p o s i t i o n   i n s t r u c t i o n s .  

7.  RECOMMENDATION:  I recommend  the  accused's  request  f o r   discharge  i n  1 i e u  
of  court-martial  be  accepted  and  she  be  separated  w i t h   an  under  other  than 
honorable  c o n d i t i o n s   discharge. 

I f  you  concur,  please  sign  t h e   attached 

2  Atch 
1.  Proposed  Action 
2.  C a s e F i l e  

cc: 

435  TAW/JA  w/o  atch