!:>AF/MRBR SECRETAR Y OF TllE AIR FORCE PERSONNl:L COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE |
CASE NUMBER FD-2014-00262 |
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 grants the requested relief.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an inequity. However, upon a close review of the record, the Board discovered that the discharge was improper in that it was inconsistent with the procedura l and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation; therefore, the board grants the applicant's requests and upgrades the discharge characterization and changes the reason and authority for 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 governmenta l 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 submitted no issues regarding the inequity or impropriety of his discharge. He cited his desire to receive the G.I. Bill benefits and to be proud of his service to his country asjustification for upgrade. The record indicates that the applicant was discharged for Misconduct -Drug Abuse. He received an Article 15 for wrongful use of over the counter cough suppressant in a manner contrary to his intended medical purpose. Additionally, the record indicates the applicant had two Letters of Reprimand (LOR) for failure to obey a lawful order, an LOR and a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for dereliction of duty and an LOR for failure to maintain hygiene. The record shows that the applicant was identified by a fellow Airman, who notified their supervisor of the applicant's drug use. The applicant admitted to "robotripping," using an over-the-counter medication to achieve a high, on several occasions. After review of the record, the Board found no evidence to indicate that the applicant did not know right from wrong or that in his two years and seven months of service was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance to drug use. 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 the discharge notification was improper, thus, denying the applicant full administrative due process. Given this finding, the Board grants an upgrade of the discharge characterization and change the narrative reason for discharge to Secretarial Authority .
CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was inconsistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and finds the applicant was not provided full administrative due process. |
AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2010-00262
i | Poof GEE J x i ee ee poo oG oF bE dG | i oy | | i of 4 | i ; ; i i ee ee | i 4 “ ee | HE | Poy od | rf - Po bod ot dg | ISSUES ‘493.19 INDEX NUMBER rn 67.10 oe a a is f A92.21 1 |ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD A93.01 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 HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 29 Mar 2012...
AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2009-00730
The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) without counsel at Andrews — AFB on 21 Jun 2012. In his testimony , he described the effects of the products similar to smoking a Newport and described Spice as providing a longer “boost.” The fact Spice was not specifically listed as a prohibited substance until June 2010 does not exclude its use from being a basis for discharge per AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.54, which states, "Drug abuse is incompatible with...
AF | DRB | CY2015 | FD-2014-00365
GENERAL: Theapplicant appealsforupgradeofdischargetoHonorable. Theapplicantwasoffered apersonalappearancebeforetheAirForceDischargeReviewBoard(ORB)butdeclinedandrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbasedontheavailableservicerecord. Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge.
AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00377_13
GENERAL: Theapplicantappealsforupgradeofdischargetohonorable. TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischarge ReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclinedandrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbasedontheavailableservicerecord. Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00375
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AB aa. Additionally, he received three Letters of Reprimand, two Records of Individual Counseling, and six Memorandum’s for Record for not wearing a seat belt, being disrespectful to a senior NCO, needing a shave, improper wear of the uniform, failure to obey a lawful order, having a negative attitude towards customers, unauthorized absence, financial irresponsibility, being late for...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00393
In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed. LOR, 27 OCT 94 - Speeding. For this misconduct you received a LOR on 27 Oct 94. d. Between on or about 5 Aug 94 and 21 Oct 94, you failed to go to your appointed place of duty at the time prescribed on 3 separate occasions.
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00207
In addition, he also received two Letters of Reprimand, two Letters of Counseling, and an Unfavorable Information File for dereliction of duty, failed to attend M-16 training twice, and failed to bring personal training gear to work as ordered. The DRB noted that when the applicant applied for these benefits, he signed a statement (DD Form 2366) that he understood he must receive an Honorable discharge to receive future educational entitlements. For y o u misconduct you received a Letter...
AF | DRB | CY2013 | FD-2013-00429_13
GENERAL:Theapplicantappealsforupgradeofdischargetohonorable.TheapplicantwasofferedapersonalappearancebeforetheDischargeReviewBoard (DRB)butdeclinedandrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbasedontheavailableservicerecord. Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinentdataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge.FINDING:TheBoard deniestheupgradeofthedischarge.TheBoardfindsthatneithertheevidenceofrecordnorthatprovidedbytheapplicant substantiates...
AF | DRB | CY2011 | FD-2010-00271
The record indicates the applicant received a two Article 15s and a Letter of Reprimand. The Board concluded that the seriousness of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career. The Board was
AF | DRB | CY2014 | FD-2014-00145
GENERAL: Theapplicantappealsforupgradeofdischargetohonorable. Theapplicantwasoffereda personalappearance beforetheDischargeReviewBoard(DRB)butdeclined andrequeststhatthereviewbecompletedbased ontheavailableservicerecord. Theattachedbriefcontainsavailablepertinent dataontheapplicantandthefactorsleadingtothedischarge.