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
COtJ!'ISKI.	llAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AllD OR ORG,\NIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OFTHt: BOARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x •#
...

...

ISSllES	A92.35	INDEX NUMBER	A66.00	EXHIBITSSUBMITTEDTOTHE   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

x •# x .#
x •# x •#

TAPE RECORDING Of PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

17 Jun 2016	FD-2016-00025
A1'1U!Q1Kn	11111	MTIONllLEAllSlllSQlSSllDGNTimATLU2Jll)AIUWC& mMEWlllMlll>' •N• l!	'
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.

Narrative reason #
.
RE Code *

(b)(6)

-	- -   	

INDORSIMENT	DATE:
TO:	FROM'

SAF/MRBR

SECR£TARY OFTHE AIR FORC£P£RSONNEl..COUNCIL
AIR FORClt DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST,SUITE 40	1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING,JRD nooR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS AJ'll, M.O :ze7'1-7IOJ

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00025	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the reason and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

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 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 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 and one Letter of Reprimand. His misconduct included wrongfully using Xanax, a schedule IV controlled substance and being apprehended for providing alcohol to a minor.

The applicant states that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on one isolated incident. The DRB recognized that the applicant had served two years before the discharge was initiated , but opined that the applicant 's misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his time in the Air Force. The Board also found no evidence to indicate that the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use . The ORB concluded that 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, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, change of reason and authority for the discharge, or change to the reenlistment code.

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 the discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief