AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE L'IJITIAL)

GRADE

AFSNISSAN

x	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	RECORD  REVIEW

NAME OFCOUNSELAND OR ORGANIZATION

(b) (6)

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

(b) (6)

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

x

OTHER	DENY
x x x x

ISSUES

A92.21 A94.55

INDEX NUMBER

A60.00

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS  SUBMITTED ATTIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DAT£	CASE NUMBER

25 Apr 2013	FD-2012-00201

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

\
/

I

I

I	f	I
I	!
l	I
I

I

···--·----	--.i..	JS!i!&	:	{
TO:	FROM:	I	I

SAFfMRBR
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY 01'THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORC& DISCHARGE Rf:YIEW BOA.RD 1535COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD Fl.OOR
ANDREWS AFB.1111> %0762-7001

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE        FD-2012-00201

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Andrews AFB on 25 April 2013.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit # 1: Applicant's Contentions
Exhibit #2-11: Submissions from the Applicant, to include character statements, awards, letters of appreciation, training records, performance reports, documentation of physical fitness, a polygraph, and a personal statement.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

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: Applicant submitted no issues regarding the impropriety of his discharge.  The applicant does submit that he believes he deserves a second  chance despite his  discrepancies so that  he may once again  serve his country in the National Guard. The record indicates the applicant falsified information regarding illegal drug use on his Personnel Security Questionnaire (PSQ) dated 30 September 1994. He had used marijuana and methamphetamine while attending the Air Force Academy, and willfully failed to disclose the fact that he used marijuana, cocaine, and other illegal drugs prior to entering the Academy.  The Board opined that while he was an otherwise outstanding duty performer who showed courage and a strong moral compass by reporting his own misconduct, the Board could not find that the positive aspects of his service record or character offset the serious misconduct he committed.  In fact, the Board noted that this type of misconduct would routinely be disposed of in a courts-martial setting. The Board concluded that the applicant's unit likely took into account his outstanding duty performance  when deciding to separate him with a General service characterization. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and has a good job.  The applicant is physically fit, and appears to be a man of purpose and integrity.  He volunteers his time and was able to present evidence of substantial and impactful volunteer work.  However, the Board felt that the DRB's purview was squarely limited to assessing the applicant's in service conduct as it related to a potential for impropriety or inequity in the discharge.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service, but it did overwhelmingly desire that the applicant consider presenting his case before the Board for Correction of Military Records (BCMR).

CONCLUSION: 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 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 and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief