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
COUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANlZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x x
x
ISSUES	A94.54	fNm:x NUMBER	A66.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITIED 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 TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

H£AJUNC DATE	CASE NUMBER

08 Jul 2016	FD-2015-00473
APPLICANTS ISSUB AND TI!ll BOARD'SDECISIONAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ON 1116ATTACHED Alll FORCE DISCHARO£ llEVIEW BOARD DECSIONAL llATIONAIA

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)

v	INDORSEMENT	DATE: 7129/2016
TO:	t'ROM:

SAFIMRBR

SECRETARY OPTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDRJlWS AFB, MD l07<il-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE ·	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00473	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization 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.

Pursuant to 10 USC 1553 this board included a member who is a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist, or a physician with training on mental health issues connected with post traumatic stressdisorder or traumatic brain injury and/or special training on mental health disorders.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING: The Board finds insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant's discharge.

DISCUSSION: The applicant was discharged for Misconduct - Drug Abuse with service characterized as Under Honorable Conditions (General). 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 and one Letter of Reprimand. His misconduct included disobeying the limited travel order, disobeying Phase III mileage radius restrictions, and testing positive  for cocaine.

The applicant contends that the majority of his career was stellar and warrants an upgrade to Honorable.  He also believes that he deserves a second chance.  The ORB tool< note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, letters of recommendation and other accomplishments.   However, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use.  The Board found the negative aspects of the willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of the applicant's performance and concluded that the discharge was appropriate.

A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record and advice from the mental health specialist, the Board found no indication that any mental health issues had an impact on the applicant's misconduct or on his discharge. Additionally, 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 administrati ve 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