AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER {LAST,FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)
(b) (6)

GRADE

TYPE BCD	x	I

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

I	RECORD  REVIEW

COuNSEL   -··. NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZ.ATION
YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

··- VOTE OFTHE BOARD

MEMBER SITTING

HON	GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

(b) (6)	x
x
x
x x

ISSUES

A93.23

INDEX NUMBER

A39.00

}...•..:. -	' EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TOTHE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

KEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

24 Jun 2015	FD-2014-00780
APPLICANTS 1SSU£ AND nm BOARD'S DE.CISION"1- RATIQNALE ARfl DISCUSSED ON nm ATTACHED AIRFO!lCB DISCHARGE REVIEW BOA!U> DECISIONAL.RATIONA!A	i
I
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)

i  .-.	---..---.- -·--  ....._._- -
TO:
SAF/MRBR

_ -.-.... --...---..-I=N=D=_ -=0!":=".==---=N-I=T=._--.__ ·.-·.:..._.- - · · . . --.. -.-. ---_-.-_-:..- - ---==-.=- -T==F,___,,,.,-.:.-:"._'_,..,".15:---_-__:_:;., ,, .:_--=:-,-.-;,,· ·_-_.--.,i
FROM:
S&CRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISOIARGE REVIEW BOARD

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

1535 COMMAND DR.EEWING, 3RDFLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00780	

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 Bad Conduct Discharge - Special Court Martial (Drug use)

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. 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 a Special Court Martial with a charge of violation of Article 112a, wrongful use of cocaine.

The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable due to having PTSD with symptoms of anxiety and depression that directly led to his drug use. After review of the records and advice from the Mental Health Specialist, the DRB found no evidence that the applicant suffered from any mental health issues that directly contributed to his misconduct and found this claim to be without merit.

The Board finds that because the applicant did not receive an administrative discharge, his contention of inequity is not applicable. The applicant received a Bad Conduct Discharge, a punitive discharge, as part of his sentence resulting from a Special Court-Martial conviction. Under the provisions of Section 1553, 10 USC, the only basis for a change of a Bad Conduct discharge is clemency. The applicant presented evidence which the DRB opined did not warrant granting clemency.

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.

Inview 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