AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2022-00662 	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 20 January 2016 in accordance with AFI 36-3208with a General discharge for Misconduct (drug abuse). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant was represented by counsel and requested the board be completed based on a record only review.

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. 

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 an Article 15.  His misconduct included wrongful possession and use of a schedule III controlled substance.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable.  He stated that he deployed to Iraq with a senior Army Special Forces Contingency Response Force Team.  He stated that he was in the country for three months and was mentored and trained by significantly more senior Special Forces soldiers.  He stated that while there, the soldiers introduced him to the use of steroids to improve his performance, strength, and recovery.  He stated that he used it for three weeks before he redeployed home.   He stated that while returning from Iraq, AFOSI agents using military working dogs (MWD) searched the plane he was on when it landed in North Carolina.   He stated that the MWD alerted on his bag and found steroids in his bag.  He stated that while on a layover in Germany, the MWD alerted two other service members’ bags, and his bag was not alerted.  He stated that his fingerprints were not found on the box containing the drugs in his bag in North Carolina.  He stated that he tested positive in a urinalysis for steroids in October 2014.  He admitted to experimental steroid use.  The applicant stated that he was discharged with a General discharge and denied the ability to rehabilitate, although, in 15 months, he was rehabilitated.  He stated that the Special Forces soldiers who introduced the steroids did not receive punishment from the US Army during their entire enlistment.

The DRB considered the applicant’s contentions and through a review of his records and testimony determined the applicant’s drug use and transportation of steroids did not constitute experimental use.  Since the steroid use and transportation did not fit the definition of experimental to satisfy the seven retention criteria, the actions taken by the applicant’s chain of command were appropriate regarding the applicant’s discharge.  Also, the applicant’s chain of command acted within its authority to state the applicant’s actions did not warrant the opportunity for Probation and Rehabilitation per the guidance in Air Force Instruction 36-3208.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career. The Board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant any changes to the discharge.  

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 2C or 3K.
 
CONCLUSION:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service, service and medical records, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service, the narrative reason for separation, and the reentry code shall not change. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 4 December 2022.  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  

Instructions on how to appeal an AFDRB decision can be found at 
https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)