AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OFSERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

x	RECORD   REVIEW
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC	OTHER

DENY
x x x x x

ISSIJES

A94.SS

INDEX NUMBER

A66.00

1	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
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

01 May 2014	FD-2013-00791

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

FR.OM:

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNC1L AIR FORCE DISCHJ\l!GE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, JRD 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-2013-00791	

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

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 DRB 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. Therefore, the Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE:  The applicant received a general discharge for Misconduct-Drug Abuse.

Although not explicitly stated the applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because his DD Form 214 states he completed his first term of service, and he was discharged after he entered the extension to his first enlistment. The Board found this contention to have no merit. On 15 November 2011, the applicant extended his enlistment for 19 months with a new date of separation (DOS) of 7 March 2014. Based on this extension, the applicant did not re-enlist, therefore, he did not complete his first term of service.

The record indicates the applicant received an Art 15 for wrongful use of marijuana  on divers occasions. The applicant was identified during a random urinalysis on 26 October 2012 and a subsequent bickel test on 8 November 2012. 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 five 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 performance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate. Moreover, the Board determined the discharge characterization is based solely on the current enlistment, which includes any extension of the enlistment made with the consent of the member, as prescribed by regulation.

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