AIR FORCE DISCHARG E REVIEW BOARD H EARING RECORD	
NAM£ Of SERVICE MEM8£R (LAST,FIRST MIOOLE INl'rlAL)
(b) (6)	GRA 0£	
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL    APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW	
COtNSEL	NAME or COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION or COUl\"SEL	
YES	No			
	x			

MEMBER SITTI NG	VOTE OF THEBOA RD	
	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
(b) (6)						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
ISSUES	A94.05	IM>EX NUMUF;R
A66.00	EXllBITS SlJBMrntmTO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINT ING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLIC'ATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LE'rrER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEFOF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXI llBITS SUBMITTED >\T TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE IIEARING	

llE>\RIN('; 01\- TI-

14 Apr 201S	CASENUM8ER

FD-2014-00759			
APPLJCl\NT'S ISSUEANDTlll!BO,\RD'S DECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE OISCllSSED ONTllEAITACllED AlR FORCE DISCllARGE REVIEW llOARD DECISIONAL RATIOALE.	
Case heard in Washington , D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right lo a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an applicat ion lo the AFBCMR.	
(b) (6)	
INDORSEl\1£NT	DATE:  5/15/20 15		
TO:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE-tO
RANDOLPH AFB,TX 78150-474	t ROM:
ECK_t'l'"R\ o..--··n1t: AIR t"ORCE PERSONNEL COl 1NCIL AIR FORCE DISCll ,\RCE R(\'I EW UOARD  15.HCOMMANO OR. EE \\ ISG..1RO fLOOR
ANDREWS AFB. MD 20762-iOOI		
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATlONA LE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00759	

GENERAL: The appl icant 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 pertinent data on the appl icant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING : The Board denies the upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUE: The appl icant received a General discharge for Misconduct - Drug Abuse

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibi l i ty to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, is authori zed to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change i s warran ted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmenta l 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, one Letter of Reprimand , and two Records of Counseling. His misconduct included failure of room i nspection, dereliction of duty, failure to go to appointed place of duty and wrongfu l use of Percocet.

The applicant contends that the discharge was inequitable because i t was based on an isolated incident in 5 years of service.   After review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use. Notwi thstandi ng the applicant's claim  that this was an isolated  incident , the Board found the seriousness of drug abuse affords the commander the authority to pursue adm i nistrati ve discharge to uphold good order and discipl ine, regardless of whether or not the member has an otherwise clear record.  The Board  found the negat ive aspects of the willfu l misconduct
outweighed the posi tive aspects of the applicant's performance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.  A discharge i s 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 just ify an upgrade of the discharge.

CONCLUS ION : The Discharge Review Board concludes that the d ischarge  was  consistent  with  the procedura l and substantive requ irements of the discharge regu lation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the appl icant was provided  full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing find ings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determi nes the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief