AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
AME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAJ1E Of COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	AODRESS ANO OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x
I	x
x x

ISSUES

A94.53

INDEX NUM6ER

A66.00

EXHIBITS SUBMITIED TO Tllt BOARD
1 ORDER APPO(NTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONN EL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITIED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE R.ECORDlNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING 0ATE	CASE NUMBER

27 May 2015	FD-2015-00069
Al'PLICANrS ISSUE AND nm SOAR.D'S DECISIONAL IV\TIOl<ALEAl\E DISCUSSED ON nm ATTACHED All\ FORCE OISCHAR<le REVlllW BOAR.I> DECISIONAi.. l\AT!ONALE.

Case heard in Wash ington, 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)	--

CNDORSEMENT	DATE:  6/1612015
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MR.BR

Sf.CRf.TARV Of THR AIR fORCf.PERSONNEL COUNCI L AI R FORCE OISCHARCE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING. JRD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	AOREWSAf8, MO 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00069	

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 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 Special Court  Martial  for  wrongfully  using cocaine, wrongfully distributing cocaine and with intent to distribute Psilocybin mushrooms. Other misconduct included one Letter of Reprimand for making false official statement to supervisor and flight chief and two Records of Counseling for failing to maintain a proper communication device and inattentive driving, almost causing an accident.

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was the result of an isolated incident during his entire time of service. After review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in his four years and eleven months of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use.  The Board concluded the applicant's misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and 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.

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