AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
Gaal.	NAME or COUNSEL AND OR ORCANll.ATIO/I	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION Of COUNSEL
Y£S	No
x
VOTE OF TIIE BOARD
MEM BER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY

-

(b)(6)	x
x	•
-
._	•	x
x	•
-
•	x
ISSUES	A94.05	INDEX NVMBER	A66.00	EXHIBITSSUBMllTEDTOTHE    BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARINC DAT£	CASE NVMB£R

04 May 2016	FD-2014-00661
Nl!.l.lilll'Q'S_..., 1llPlllUPll M   ff'ILMl10N'Al.&Mm ON11'6AtTllCBDAa	-...9!11DI•	II&

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)	-

INOORSEMENT	Mn: 51512016
'
TO:	>ltOM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFTHEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COVNCIL AIR t"ORCE DISCHARCE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	15.lSCOMMAND DR. EE WING, JRD fLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDll&WS AfB, MD ,lj)76Z.?IOI

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00661	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of his discharge characterization 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 characterization.

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. The applicant's record of service included one Article  15 for use of Spice.

The applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the service. He claims that his one-time incident of misconduct did not warrant a General characterization discharge. The DRB took note of the applicant's documented duty performance and other accomplishments. However, the Board found evidence to indicate that the applicant was well aware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance of drug use. The DRB found that the negative aspects of the willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of the applicant's career 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.

The Board highly recommends that if the applicant can provide additional information to substantiate his contentions, he should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  Ifthe applicant chooses to exercise this right, he should provide evidence of any inequity or impropriety, as well as proof of any exemplary post-service accomplishments or contributions to the community.

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: Examiner's Brief