AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, fCRST MJDDLE lNfTlAL)
(b) (6)	GRADE	
TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW	
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORCANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORCANIZATION OF COUNSEL	
YES	No			
	x			

MEMBER SITTING	VOTE OF THE BOARD	
	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY	
(b) (6)						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
						x	
ISSUES
A94.53	INDEX NU!\.·1BER
A66.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD	
		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMIITED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE R.ECORDLNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEAR!J'lG	
H£ARJ.'1C l)ATE

13 Jul 2015	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00221			
APPUCANl''S ISSUE AND 11iE 801\RD'S DtCJSIONAL RATlONALEARBDISCUSSllD ON TIIE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHAROEIUM'.EW 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)	--	
INOORSEMENT	DATE: 812112015	
TO:
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST. SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB.TX 78150-4742	FROM:
SECRETARY or THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AJR FORCE DISCHAACE REVIEW BOARD
ISlS COMMAND OR. EE WI NG. JRD Ft,OOR ANDREWS AFB,MO ?076!-7001	
AFHQ  FOR.J'\1 0-2077, JA.1'1' 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00221	

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 Article 15 for wrongfully using an intoxicating substance, with intent to become intoxicated or alter mood or function; conduct was prejudicial to  good order and discipline.

The applicant submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. The applicant cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits as just ification for upgrade . The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366, on September 4, 2009) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. The Board was sympathetic to the impact from the loss of these benefits to the applicant; however, this is not a matter
of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.  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 procedura l 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