•
AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD
-X   RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE
GEN	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATJON

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANJ7;A Tl()N ()}' COUNSEL

MEMBERS SITTING	HON
- - - - - - - - - - - --- - -- --- - -- - - - - - -- ---- - - - - ---------------+----+----+-----+------+x-------!
x x x x

ISSUES

INDEX NUMBER

A92.21, A92.37	A66.00

l ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

REARING DATE
03-05-21

CASE NUMBER
FD2003-00098

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TTMF OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

Case hea rd at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Boa rd, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the A FBCMR.

SAF
550	ET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

-·
'

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2003-00098	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, and to change his reenlistment code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge. FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.
The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for misconduct, drug abuse, and for fraudulent enlistment. During the course of a security clearance background investigation, derogatory information about a civilian arrest for marijuana possession to distribute, and being a minor transporting alcohol was discovered which applicant had not entered on his enlistment forms. In an effort to resolve these matters, applicant underwent a polygraph examination by the Defense Security Service. The examiner didn't believe member was truthful in his answers, and during a post-test interview the member so admitted. In a signed sworn statement, member recounted multiple incidents of pre-service illegal drug use, and one incident of in-service illegal drug use while at technical training. Member indicated to the investigator that he lied on the polygraph questions because he liked the Air Force and was afraid of losing his job. At the time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and submitted a statement in his own behalf in which he said he lied on his enlistment forms because the recruiter told him to, and that in spite of his admission under oath to the defense security service investigator, that he did not use marijuana while in technical school. Applicant now feels his post-service achievements provide a basis on which to justify an upgrade of his discharge "despite his past mistakes." Because the member received an administrative discharge, not a punitive discharge, the Board must find an inequity or impropriety on which to base an upgrade; clemency is not available as a reason for upgrading an administrative discharge. The Board noted that both drug abuse and fraudulent enlistment constitute serious misconduct that is not compatible with Air Force standards. The Air Force's drug policy was and is well publicized and all members are continually made aware that illegal drug use is not tolerated. Additionally, were it not for the falsification of his enlistment documents, it is doubtful applicant would have been allowed into the Air Force based on his extensive pre-service illegal drug use and his arrest record. The Board finds the discharge proper; the records review disclosed no inequity or impropriety on which to base an upgrade.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and 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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief