AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x
x

A93.01

A67.10 A66.00

l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL"S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDfflONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUffiER

10 Jan 2014	FD-2013-00624

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

SECR£TAR\' OF 1liEAIR  'ORCE PERSONNELCOUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING. 3R.D FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB,MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00624	

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.
ISSUE:	Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Drug Abuse and Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary  Infractions

Applicant contends that he should not be penalized indefinitely for mistakes he made when he was young. The record indicates the applicant received one Article 15, three Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, and one Record of Individual Counseling. His misconduct included used marijuana, failed to go to duty on time (4x), and failed to clean dorm smoking area as requested by SNCO. 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 two years and four months of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use. Additionally, the DRB recognized the applicant was 21 years of age when the discharge took place. However, there is no evidence he was immature or did not know right from wrong. The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct. The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.

The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well 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.

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