AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2019-00394	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 31 Mar 11 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a(n) Under Honorable Conditions - General discharge for Discharge Misconduct.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable and a change to the discharge narrative reason.  The board was conducted on 08 Oct 19.  

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), but declined and requested the board be completed based on a records only review.  The applicant was not represented by counsel.    

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 upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable and to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority.  The board also denied to change the reenlistment eligibility code.

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’s record of service included several Letters of Counseling and Reprimand and an Article 15.  The misconduct included: excessive speeding, underage drinking and wrongful use of controlled substance.

The applicant’s counsel contends that the discharge was inequitable and improper.  The counsel contends that the impropriety is based on the applicant’s unknowing use of the controlled substance and the commander not giving sufficient weight to the evidence of the applicant’s lack of knowledge.  They state that the separation authority did not make finding regarding each of the limited circumstances warranting the applicant’s retention.  They also contend that the discharge was inequitable due to the stress the applicant was under at the time, mitigating his lapse in judgement when offered the controlled substance.  Lastly, the applicant and counsel contended his one-time unknowing use of the controlled substance did not warrant a General discharge and it was overly harsh.

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The board also took note of the applicant's service of over 2 years, duty performance as documented by his performance reports, awards and decorations, and other accomplishments.  After reviewing the service record, the DRB found no evidence to indicate the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance for illegal drug use.  It concluded that the seriousness of the applicant’s willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of his service.  

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. 

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 10 Jan 20.  If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to:  

Air Force Review Boards Agency
Attn: Discharge Review Board
3351 Celmers Lane
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief