AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ll EA RI G RECORD
NA:\1£ 0F SEl(\l lCF. :\lb\IOEll (LAST, Fiil.ST,\J JDOLE IN ITIAL)	CRAOE	AFS'll/SSAN
(b)(6)
T\ PE  GEN	I	PERSONA L   APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   RE\"IEW
COl SlL	'\\It" OHOl ,[L \\ DOR ORG \\l/ \TIO\	\DORE "OOR DRC"l 7.ATl0'OF <"Ol "'
HS	'•
x	I

M EMBER SITTI  ·c	,._.

VO I t: OFTH£ 80.\RO
IJON	Gl,N	UOl llC	OTllFR	OF'IY

(b)(6)	x
x x
x x

ISSllt:;:,

A93.17

lf\Ot.'.\ 'l\llH'R

A66.00

EX lllBJ'I SSl OMITTED TO Tll E BOA RO
1	OIWl·R Al'l'OIN JING 1ll F B(MRD
2	Al'l'I ((' \ 1 10\J IOK IU:\ 11:\I 01 DN llARGI-
3	II·I II·I{ 01  NO 111-l('A I ION
4	BRll I 01 l'FRSONt"tl 1 IU
COl  SI I S RH FASI' 10 1111 l30\IW
\1)1)1110\J ,\I l.XlllUll   Sl ll\111 II D \ I 11:-.11- 01'
l'I R$0:-.J \I ,\l'l'I \R\NCJ
IWI  Kl ( OKDIN(, OI  l'I RO' \I   \l'PI ARA,(T UEARl"\G

111:\Rl'G D\Tt	( \.\I '1 \181 R

17   Ia.- 20 15	FD-2014-00396
APPL.ICA'I s I'S.St "E A'O Tiil OiARD"S DI ("ISAI. R..A flONAl.C ARP 01.SCl Et> °"TIU AnA01EO AIR FORCC 01'.i\llA.R.Cif Rrvtr\\ l\()Al':D Of(l lt)NA!, RATIO'ALr

Case heard in Washi ngton. D.C.

Advise :lpp l icant of the decis ion of the Board, the right to a persona l appearance wi th1withou t cou nsel . and the right to suhm i t an appl ication to the /\ FBCM R.

(b)(6)

INDORSDID'T	OA1E: j/ZJ/2015
TO	IRO\I

\IJU3R

\F	't CIH f \k\ n.. llU  \I W J.OtU • PJ W\0\   JI  C Ol \fll
\IR H>R<t Dl\(11\llGI Rl \ lr\\ 110\RO
'\'\U C \ I RI I I \\ I 'I'l I l l 40	l(H (0\1\l \,llOA . t • \\"<:·\RO H OOA
R \ DOI Pl I \I B. I\ :-;1 50 1742	\\ ORI \\' \tll. llU M76l 7001

AFll Q FORl\ 1 0-2077, J,\ N 00	(cr-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00396	

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: The applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Drug Abuse

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substantial credible evidence to rebut the presumption , to include evidence submitted by the applicant. The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that Jed to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the perti nent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant's record of service included a legal review citing the reason for discharge as drug abuse, specificall y using Hydrocodone and Oxycodone.

The applicant contends that his discharge was improper; stating that the urinalysis used to determine his discharge was incorrect. Applicant stated that he admitted to the use of Hydrocodone that was prescribed to his wife but was discharged for testing positive for substances other than what he admitted to.  AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.54, which states, "Drug abuse is incompatible with military service and airmen who abuse drugs one or more times are subject to discharge for misconduct." Paragraph 5.54.1 defines drug abuse broadly to include "illegal, wrongful, or improper use, possession , sale, transfer, or introduction onto a military installation of any drug." The term "drug" is also defined broadly to include not just illegal or controlled substances, other than alcohol, that is inhaled, injected, consumed, or introduced into the body in any manner for purposes of altering mood or function. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a
significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.

A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization.

CONCLUSION : The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation , was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that 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 detennines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief