AIR FORCE DISCH ARG E REVJEW BOARD H EARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (lAST, FIRST MlDOLE INITIA L)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE  GEN	I	PERSONA L   APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD   REVIEW
COUNS&L	NAllE OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGA1"17..ATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
M EMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x
I	x
ISSUES	A93.23	INDEX NUMBER	A66.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITI'EDTOTHEBOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING Tl IE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTrFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARJNG

ll EARING DATE	CASE NUM 8ER

09 Jun 20 15	FD-2014-00614
APPLICANT'SISSU!; AND THE BOAAD'S DECISIONAL RAnONALEAREDISCUSSED ON 1llEATTACHED AIR FORCE Dl':CHARGE 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:   611912015
..----
TO:	f'f(0;\1:

SAF/MR.BR

SECRETARV or THE AIR FORCE PERSONl\"EL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW llOARO
550 CSTREET WEST, SUITE 40	lS COMMAND OR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AFB, MD 2076!-7001

AFHQ  FORM 0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-Y2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NU MBER

FD-2014-00614	

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 Ajr Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsi bility 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 wrongfully using marijuana.

The applicant contends that the discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh.  She claims that she suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, which led to her use of marijuana.  After review of the
records and advice from the Mental Health Specialist, the DRB found no evidence that the applicant suffered from any major depressive disorders.  There was no indication that the applicant had any mental health
issues that directly contributed to her misconduct. 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.

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 , reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

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 determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment:
Exa miner's Brief