AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

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

GRADE	I AFSN/SSAN

TYPE  GEN	x	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE
S!".1':':''.:·., ';'   NAME OF COUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZATION YES	No
x

I	RECORD   REVIEW

I

ADDRESS ANO OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
x

x

x x x

.00

l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4  BRIEF or PERSONNEL FI LE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TH E BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXH IBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING  DATE	CASE NU!\:IBER

12 May 2014	FD-2013-00220

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.

TO•

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

FROM•

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ISJS COMMAND OR, EE WING, JRO FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MO 20762- 7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00220	

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

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (ORB),  without  counsel,  at Andrews AFB on 12 May 2014.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #5: Applicant's Resume
Exhibit #6: Applicant's Current Employment One Year Anniversary Card Exhibit#7:  Applicant's Federal Student Loan Statement
Exhibit#8:  Applicant's Certificates of Completion

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.

ISSUE: Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Drug Abuse

Applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge.  The applicant does submit that he believes he deserves a second chance despite his discrepancies so that he may excel in his civilian career.  Additionally, during the course of the hearing the applicant did state he was immature during his time in the service, but took responsibility for all of his misconduct and did not ask the Board to consider his immaturity as an equity issue. The record indicates that the applicant received an Article 15 for use of marijuana.  The applicant testified that he admitted to the use during an OSI investigation. Although not a basis for discharge, the following misconduct was considered at the time of discharge.  The applicant  received one Vacation, five Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Admonishment, and two letters of counseling.  This misconduct included slept on duty, failed to go to CDC pretest appointment, failed to go to Ergo Appointment, cited for exhibition driving in dorm parking lot, involved in physical and verbal altercation with a local national security guard, failed to pay Government Travel Card, failed to follow guidance pertaining to preventing wind damage to vehicle doors, reported for duty unshaven after being ordered to shave by flight sergeant, and failed to go to duty on time (2x).  After review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in his three years of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use.  The Board found the negative aspects of the willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of the applicant's perfonnance
and concluded that the discharge was appropriate

The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant has graduated college and has a good job.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.L Bill benefits as justification for upgrade.  The ORB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on July 27. 1999) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements.  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.	

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