AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2017-00470	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 15 Aug 14 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Entry Level Separation for Fraudulent Entry into Military Service - Drug Abuse.  The applicant appealed for a change to the discharge narrative reason and reenlistment eligibility code. 

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, at Joint Base Andrews, MD, on 22 May 18.  Witnesses were present, but did not testify on the applicant’s behalf.  The following additional exhibit was submitted at the hearing:  a certificate of appreciation from the Disney Internship Program. 
 
The attached examiner’s brief (provided to applicant only), extracted from available service records, contains pertinent data regarding the circumstances and character of the applicant’s military service. 
  
FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to change the discharge narrative reason to “Secretarial Authority.”  It also voted unanimously to change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code to “2C” so it is correct.  

DISCUSSION:  The DRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge if such changes are warranted.  If applicable, the board can also change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code.  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 determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  

The applicant contended his discharge was inequitable because he was essentially punished for telling the truth after being taught the Air Force Core Values and applying them.  He argued that self-reporting his previous illegal drug use and taking personal responsibility rather than blaming his recruiter were both admirable.  He also noted he did not lie after entering active duty, only during the recruiting process.  

The DRB recognized the applicant eventually chose to tell the truth and this resulted in his discharge.  However, it also noted he was not truthful on multiple occasions during his interactions with his recruiter and Military Entrance Processing Station personnel, and when he completed application paperwork to join the Air Force.  The board also focused on the fact that he initialed an AF Form 2030 on 9 Oct 13 indicating he understood the Air Force’s illegal drug use policy.  After that date, he used illegal drugs again, and then denied doing so when he recertified and signed that same form on 1 Jul 14.   

CONCLUSION:  The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge.  Therefore, the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved.  However, the board determined the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code should be changed to “2C” so it is correct.  

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 8 Jun 18.  If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to:  SAF/MRBR (CITU), 550-C Street West, Suite 41, Randolph AFB, TX  78150-4743.
  
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief