AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAi\IE OF SERVICE flIEMBER (LAST,FIRST MlODLE INITIA L)	Cl<A l)E	AFSN/SSJ\N
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	J>ERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   REVIEW
COUNSEi..	NAME Of COUNSEL ANO OR ORCANIZATIO.	ADDRESSAND OR0RCAN17..ATIONOF COUNSEL
\'F.S	No
x
VOTE Of TllE BOA RO
M EMBER SITTING	ll ON	GtN	UOTllC'	OTllER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
x

x x x

ISS 'ES

A94.53

INOt:X NlIBt-:R

A66.00

EXlllBITS SUBi\llTrEDTO THE 80A R0
1 ORDFR A PPOINTING TllE BOARD
2  /\PPUC'1\ f'ION FOR REVIEW OF DISC'lIA RGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFl('AIION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FlLE
COUNSEL'S RFLEASF TO Tl IF BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXllll31'1 s SUUM I nED A r·1 1ME OF
PERSONAL Al'l'l:t\RANCL:
TAPE RECORDING OF l'ERSONi\I. A PPEARANCE IIEJ\RING

llE\RINC l).\TE	CASt N l\IO l:R

26 Feb 2015	FD-2014-00494
APPLICANr sISSUE A>.0 nII.SOA RD' l>l CISIONAI. KA rKlNAI. AKEl)SOJSSW ON'IHEA ITACllEO AIK	C'E 01'C'HARvEREVIEW BOARl)OfflMONAL RATIONALF.

Case heardin Washington,D.C.

Advise applicant of the dec sion of t he Board, the right to <i pcrso1rnl oppcarnncc wi th/without counsel,ond the r ght to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

(b)(6)

-

I OORSEMENT	DATE: 3ll9/2015
10:	rnO)l:
SAFll\IRUR	SE<'Rf.'r,\H\  OF TllEt\IR FOtlC"E Pl'.: RSO,'\ Sl:L. COl '-"Cit.
AIR t'ORCt'. OISCllARGE RF.\'J t \\ BOA RD
550 <:STREET \\'F.ST. SUITE -10	l:\\  C'O:°'l'\1:\;..0 l)R,Ct: \\li"lG.JRIJ FLOOR
RANDOLP ll AFO. TX ?!t i 50--17-12	\ NDRt:llS M'6. IOl076l-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCH ARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00494	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record .

The attached brief contains available perti nent 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 Drug Abuse

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsi bili ty 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 cred ible 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 perti nent standards of equity and propriety.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. The applicant does submit that he would like to use his post 9/1 1 G.I. Bill due to him being a veteran. The records show that the applicant was convicted by a General Court Martia l for wrongful use of Methamphetamine. After review of the record , the Board found no evidence to ind icate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in his three years of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use. The Board found the negat ive aspects of the willful misconduct outweighed the posi tive aspects of the applicant's performance and concluded that the d ischarge was appropriate.

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

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedura l and substant ive requirements of the discharge regulation,  was wi thin the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the applicant was provided fu ll adm inistrative due process.

In view of the foregoi ng find ings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basi s for upgrade of discharge and detenni nes the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Exami ner's Brief