AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00151	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 30 April 2019 in accordance with AFI 36-3209 with a General Discharge for Misconduct-Drug Abuse through Urinalysis. 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 appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 26 July 2022. No witnesses were present to testify on the applicant’s behalf. 

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 stated that the discharge is inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident in 83 months of service. Additionally, the member contended that the character was unjust because it does not fit his enlistment. 

During the personal appearance, the applicant highlighted that the ingestion of cocaine was unbeknownst to him, and that it must have either, come from residue, as he slept in the area where his roommates did drugs, or it could have been an intentional effort of sabotage from his roommate that he didn’t get along with. The applicant also mentioned that he could have met retention criteria per the AFI. In the closing statement, the applicant explained that he takes responsibility for being in the situation that resulted in his discharge, and if he could have gotten out of the situation earlier, he would have. He also highlighted that he provided significant evidence in support of his claim to the command, but it did not help his case. 

The DRB found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant upgrade of the discharge. After considering all documentation as well as the applicant’s personal testimony, the board determined that there was insufficient evidence to overcome the preponderance of evidence standard used by the command during his time in service, nor did the applicant provide substantial credible evidence to support his contention to the Board.  

Additionally, the Board considered the factors laid out in the attachment to the Under Secretary of Defense memorandum, Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations, dated 25 June 2018, known as the “Wilkie Memo.”  The Board considered the factors listed in paragraphs (6)(a)-(6)(l) of this memorandum.

(6)(j).  Similarly situated Service members sometimes receive disparate punishments.  A Service member in one location could face court-martial for an offense that routinely is handled administratively across the Service. While a court-martial or a command would be within its authority to choose a specific disposition forum or issue a certain punishment, DRBs should nevertheless consider uniformity and unfair disparities in punishments as a basis for relief. 

The applicant did not receive disparate punishment in this case. On the contrary, use of cocaine is perceived by the general population, as being a harsher act of misconduct than other drugs such as marijuana, therefore, often resulting in an Under Other Than Honorable Discharge rather than the General discharge characterization that the applicant received. 

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/medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “General”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Misconduct-Drug Abuse through Urinalysis, and the reentry code shall remain “6H”. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 29 July 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)