ITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
					x	
					x	
					x	
					x	
					x	

A66.00

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'SRELEASETO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

H£ARINC DATE	CASE NUMBER

02 Aug 2013	FD-2013-00378

Case heard in 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.

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 78150-4742

SECRl".TARY OFTHEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
153!COMMAND DR. EE WING, 3RD Ft.OOR A;'IDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSNISSAN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

x

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER S

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00378	

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 and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

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 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: The record indicates that the applicant was discharged for Misconduct-Drug Abuse. Applicant contends he was falsely accused by another Airman of using an illegal substance during his Air Force career. He also contends he never used and illegal substances during his time in the Air force and he never failed a random urinalysis testing. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana between 23 July 2003 and on or about 14 August 2004. OSI began investigating the applicant after receiving statements form multiple individuals stating that the applicant smoked marijuana approximately thirty to thirty-five times since joining the Air force. Based on the information from OSI the Commander decided to discharge the applicant for drug abuse. According to AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.54, Misconduct: Drug Abuse, drug use is incompatible with military service and Airman who abuse drugs one or more times are subject to discharge. Drug abuse for the purpose of this regulation is the illegal, wrongful, or improper use, possession, sale, transfer, or introduction onto a military installation of any drug. This includes improper use of prescription medication. The term drug includes any controlled substance in schedules I, II, III, IV, and V of Title 21 U.S.C., Section 812. 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 and seven months 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 performance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.

In addition to the non-judicial punishment for Drug Abuse, applicant received a Letter of Reprimand and
a Letter of Counseling. His misconduct included failure to obey lawful order, speeding on base, and received a traffic violation for making an illegal turn. The Board opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his behavior.  They found the seriousness of the willful	
misconduct offset any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance.   The Board reviewed the entire
record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.

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