AIR FORCE DlSCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAi\ U:0'SF.R\'ICE i\IEi\IBER (L \ST. FIRST ;\llDDLE INITIAL)	CllAOE	Af SN SSAN
(b) (6)
TYn GEN	I	PERSONAL A PPEA RANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW

,.

COUNSI.	'IMI E OF (Ol NSl L A \II) OR ORGANl7.\TI ON	ADDRESS AD OR ORGANl7.ATION OFCOUNSEi,
'E
x
VOTE OF Tl IE BOARD
M El\ IBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTllC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x x
ISSl'F!o	A94.39	"Of\.  'l'\I BD	A66.00	EXHIRITS SUB\111TF:O TO TllF. llOAlm
1 ORDER APPOINTING TlIt: OOARD
2   APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DIS<'tlARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4	OR lt:F or PERSONNCL FILE COUNSfL'S RELEASETOTllE BOt\RD
ADDITION1\L  EXHIBITS  SUBMITTED AT TIMEor PFRSON.-\1  APPFARANCF
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE llE1\RING

ll EARl'IG l) \TE	< \ SE :-Ol \1111.R

19 Mar 2015	F0-2014-00581
APPLICAl<T'S lSSl'I! A'0THE 00,>,RO'S DEC' ISIO\IAL RATIONALE ARE OISCI ISSED ON Tiii' ATTAC"H ED AIR FORCE DtCHARGE REVIE\\ BOARD DEC"L>IONAL RATIO,Al£

Case heard in Wash ington. D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the 1ight to submit an application to the AFBCM R.

(b) (6)

INOORSE:i\ 1£ "T	DATE:  3/24/20 15	I
TO.	FRO\I :

S.\F;1\1ROR

SECRETA RI' or Tll[MR ORCE PERSONNEL COUNC'l l
AIR F()RCf. OISf'llARCE RE\'IE\\'BOARD
550 C SlREE'I   \\'EST, Slll IF .JO	1;.1;CO.\l IAKD DR.EE II I NC•.IRD FLOOR
Ri\NDOLPI I \FB,  1 X 7& 150-174:	ANOJU W  Af'D. \ID ?076?-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHA RG E REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE '\l \IllER

FD-2014-00581	

GE  ERAL: The appl icant appeals for upgrade of discharge to I lonorablc.

The appl icant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (ORB) but declined and req uests that the review be completed based on the avai Iable service record.

The attached brier contai ns available perti nent data on the applican t and the factors lead ing to the discharge.

FINDING : Th e Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE: The appl icant recei ved a General discharge for M iscond u<.:t	Drug Abuse

The Ai r Force Discha rge Review Board , under i ts responsibi l i t y to examine the propriety and equity of an Appl icant's discharge, i s authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge i f such change is warranted. I n reviewi ng discharges, the Board presumes regulari ty  i n  the  cond uct  of govern mental affairs u nless there is substantial cred i ble evidence to rebut the presumption, to include evidence submitted by t he applicant.  The Board completed a thorough review of the circumstances that led to the discharge and t he discharge process to ensure the discharge met t he pertinent standards of equity and propriety.   The applicant's record of service included a Summary Court Martial  where he pied guilty and
\\'US found gui lty of using marijuana on d ivers occasions.

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable because i t was u n fair: he states he was discharged on one occurrence or repeated drug use and that his 3 years in the sen ice was otherwise Honorable.  At1cr review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the appl icant did not k now right from wrong or that
in his three years or service was unaware of the Air Force policy or 1.ero tolerance to drug use. The Board found the negat ive aspects of the willful miscond uct outweighed t he posi ti ve aspects of the applican t's perfo1111ance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.

A d ischa rge is upgraded on l y i f the appl icant and the Board can est abl ish that an ineq ui ty or i mpropri ety took pl ace at t he t ime or disdrnrgc. A fter a thorough review or t he record, t he Boa rd found no evide1m.; to
justi fy an u pgrade or the discharge characterization. reason for t he discha rge or the reenl istment code.

CONCLUS ION: The Discharge  Review Board concl udes t hat t he discharge was <.:011 istent wi t h t he proced u ral and substant ive requi remen ts of the discha rge regulat ion. \\'as wi t hi n the discretion of t he discharge authori t y. and that the appl icant was pro,·ided ful l administrat i ,·c due process.

I n \'iew or t he foregoi ng find ings. the Board further concludes t hat there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and detem1ines the discha rge should rema i n unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief