AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD REARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MfDOLE INITIAL)

(b) (6)	GRADE	
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL   APPEARANC E	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW	
COUNSEL	NAM£ OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS A; D OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL	
YES	No			
	x			

MEMBER SITTING	VOTE OF THE BOARD	
	HON	GEN	uornc	OTHER	DENY	
(b) (6)						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
ISSUES	A93.23	li"lOf.X NUMBER
A66.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPL!CATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FLLE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBM ITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
HEARING DATE

09 Jun 2015	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00481			
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD·s DECISIONAL RATJONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATIACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.	
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.

(b) (6)	
INDORSEMENT	DATE:   7110/2015	
TO:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB. TX 78150-4742	PROM:
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE OISCHARGE R.EVIEW BOARD
I S3S COMMAND DR. EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
-"°"DREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001	
AFRQ FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00481	

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 led to the discharge and the discharge process to ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. In order to adhere to Mental Health Amendments to  10 USC 1553, a physician with specialized training on mental health disorders was present for this board. The applicant's record of service included one Article 15 for possession of 38 tablets of Modafinil  a Schedule IV controlled substance and possession of three syringes containing fungal spores of Psilocybe Cubenisis.

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. He claims that his infractions were directly related to his mental health and sleep difficulties. After review of the records and advice from the Mental Heal th Specialist, the DRB found no evidence that the applicant had any mental health or sleep issues that directly contributed to his misconduct and found this claim to be without merit. The administrative actions taken against the applicant gave ample opportunities for him to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure  from  conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate

The applicant also cited his desire to receive the G.l. Bill benefits as justification  for upgrade.  The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on February 6, 2009) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements.  The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of these benefits to the applicant; however, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.
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 authori ty, 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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged.	

Attachment: Examiner's Brief