AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAMt OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FffiST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)

TYPE GEN	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD REVIEW
CQUNSEL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANLZl\TION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x x
x x
ISSUES	A94.53	INDEX NUMBER	A66.00	EXHIBITS SUBMIIT£D TO Till BOARD
1  ORDER APPOINT ING THE BOARD
2   APPl..JCATION FOR REVI EW OF DISCHARGE
LETTER OF NOTlFlCATION
BRlEF OF PERSONN EL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDJTIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITT ED AT TIME Of PERSONAL APPEARA NCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE H EARING

HEARING DAT£	CASE NUMBER

23 Jul 2015	FD-2015-00042
APPUCM''l"S ISSUE Al<O nlll OOARD'SDECISIONAL RATIONALE AR.E DlSCUSSED ON TiiEATl'ACHED A.(R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW 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:  7124/2015	
TO:	
SAF/MRBR
550 C STREET WEST.SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	FROM:	
SECRETARY or THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
I  5 COMMAND OR.EE WING. JRO FLOOR
A. OREWS AFB, MD 2076Z..7001	
AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00042	

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.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of 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 two Article 15s and two Letters of Reprimand . His misconduct included exceeding the posted speed limit on a military installation; willfully disobeying, assaulting, using disrespectful language toward a SNCO; failure to report for duty at the time prescribed ; willfully damaging military property; and wrongfully using marijuana.

The applicant contends that he was young and unfocused, trying to make a change in his life.  He also stated that he had a difficult time adjusting to a military lifestyle.  The DRB recognized the applicant was 23 years of age when the discharge took place.  However, there is no evidence he was immature.  The Board opined the applicant was older than the vast majority of first-term members who properly adhere to the Air Force's standards of conduct.  After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong, or that in his one year and six months of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use.  The DRB concluded that the characterization of the applicant's discharge was appropriate due to the misconduct.  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