AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMO ER (LAST, FIRST MIOOLE IN ITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

... t;Otl!IDL
'	.A"£ OF COUNS!l.MOOR ORGANIZATION
¥ ES	Ne
x

RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS ANO OR ORGAJOZATION OF COUNSEL

·

MEMBER SITTING

l

!	i
I
l

HON
x

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

*

I

I

i	x	*
I	j
'	!	*	x
l	!

I

l

I

I	x

1:i.:"tUt.

i
A93.23

II
i
INOl;X NUMRER

x
A66.00

A94.39	A62.00

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2    Al'Pl.ICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF 01' PERSONNEL FILE
\OUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAi APPEARANCE
TAPE RE\ORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE  HEARING

H EARINC DATE	CASE NUMBER

22 Sep 2014

FD-2011-00212

I!- FOR  £DL<;CHA\\0E REVIEW .80AR0 l>ECISl<»IAL

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an application to the A FBCMR.

Names and votes wi ll be made available to the applicant at the appl icant's request.

* CHANGE REA SON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY

SAFIM RBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 7S l 5-4742

L	
.'.)U.Kt. IAH\ V t I tit. AIK tVK\.t. ruuv1•J•..,.,. '-"-··-·­
AI R .-ORCE DIS(.'llARCE REV ll W BOARD 15J5 COMMAND OR. CE WINC. JRD Fl.OOR ANORf.WS MB.MD l076l-7001

AFHQ  FORM  0-2077, JAN  00	(EF-V2)	Previous edit ion will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2011-00212	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference between Andrews AFB Maryland and Travis AFB California on 22 Sep 2014.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:
Exhibit   #6: Applicant's DD Form 293 (dtd 2008, 2010, & 201 1); DD Form 149 (dtd 2008 & 2009) Exhibit   #7: Applicant's VA Ratings Decision Letter
Exhibit    #8: Applicant's VA Denial Decision  Letter for MGIB Exhibit   #9: Letter from Spirit Rock, dtd 2 1 May 2014
Exhibit # I 0: Pictures presented to board via VTC during pre-brief

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

FINDING: The Board finds that neither the evidence ofrecord nor that provided by applicant substantiates an impropriety that would justify a change of the discharge service characterization. However, based upon the record and evidence provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant's reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

ISSUE: 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 character 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.

1.	Applicant contends she never tested positive for drugs on active duty. Discharge for drug abuse does not require a positive urinalysis. However, it does require a preponderance of evidence to support the basis for discharge. In this case, the discharge was supported by a statement from the applicant on an AF Form 1 168, "Statement of  Suspect, Witness or Complainant" (with regard to a room inspection, various suspicious contents, in-service drug use and prior drug use) which  was not available in the record. There was no corroborating evidence to support her admission; e.g., mushrooms with hallucinogenic properties where not found in  her possession, etc. The applicant testified she consumed mushrooms while on active duty; however, they were not taken for hallucinogenic purposes and did not produce a hallucinogenic effect. The Board found the applicant credible. Given the above, the Board found that the evidence did not supp01i drug abuse as a basis for discharge.

2.	Applicant contends she was delusional from schizophrenia which was diagnosed "in the service." The medical record does not support the applicant's contention. A review of the record shows she was given an Axis I diagnosis of adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depression and an axis II diagnosis of personality disorder with schizotypal and borderline traits. She provided a letter from her mental health provider (dated 2 November 2010) which attributes her admissions regarding drug use to schizophrenia and states they were untrue. However, at the hearing, the applicant testified that she had pre-service expe1iences with mushrooms that altered her mood/function, i.e., produced hallucinogenic effects. She conveyed at least one experience at age 15. In this case, the applicant's statements do, contrary to responses on the enlistment paperwork, record responses from the applicant that she used illegal/illicit drugs repeatedly prior to her enlistment. Unfortunately, each applicant is responsible for his/her responses on official documentation. The actions of the applicant were determined to be fraudulent.	

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that one basis for discharge (drug abuse) was inconsistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and finds the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. However, the discharge for fraudulent enlistment was proper.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of the discharge, but the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief