AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2019-00670	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 15 Sep 16 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 11 Feb 20.  

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 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, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 3K.

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 one Article 15 for wrongful possession and use of marijuana.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because there was no evidence to support the narrative reason, and he was given poor advice by the Area Defense Counsel (ADC).  The applicant states that he complied with a request to provide a urine sample after another airman who was caught using marijuana implicated him.  He insists that denied his involvement when questioned by the Office of Special Investigation (OSI), and the negative result when his urine was tested confirmed that he did not use marijuana.  The applicant states that is was not until being advised by the ADC of the potential for jail and punitive discharge that he admitted to something he did not do.  The applicant believes that if he were not given the advice by the ADC, he would not have admitted to something he did not partake in.  The applicant contends the discharge was improper because his service absent this incident was exemplary.
 
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.  The board discovered the applicant provided explicit details in his admission of marijuana use.  The board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his military 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 27 Apr 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 (Applicant Only)