AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT CASE NUMBER FD-2020-00272 The applicant was discharged on 17 Mar 2016 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization to Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code and separation code. The board was conducted on 8 Sep 2020. The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference using VIDYO Cloud Connect between Joint Base Andrews, MD, and the applicant's and counsel's locations on 8 Sep 2020. No witnesses were present and testified 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. FINDING: The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant's request to upgrade her discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code and separation 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. Through counsel, the applicant contended the discharge was inequitable and was the result of command discretion following non-judicial punishment to automatically discharge for drug use. During her hearing the applicant revealed that she had suffered childhood trauma at the hands of her father that resulted in his conviction and incarceration. She claimed that she started suffering from anxiety while in the service upon receiving news that her father would be released from prison early. She further claims that there was limited mental health care available at her duty location to help her cope with the anxiety and that she did not feel comfortable discussing her issues with her command leadership. She also stated she declined prescription medication as she did not want to rely on them and did not want to hinder her unit operations. Therefore, she asserts her mental health issues mitigated her decision to take a non-prescribed medication to help her with increasing insomnia issues resulting from anxiety. The applicant submitted a letter from her former commander that initiated the discharge action supporting her request for an upgrade. He stated in his letter that at the time of her discharge he was unaware of the circumstances that led to her drug use, and had he known that at the time, he would have considered recommending her for retention based on her duty performance. The DRB determined the applicant's contentions were without merit. After a thorough review of the service record the DRB found that the applicant's mental health condition was the result of childhood trauma and was not aggravated by her military service, therefore liberal consideration under 10 USC ยง 1553 does not apply. Furthermore, although the applicant's former commander indicated had he known how she came into possession of the medication he would have recommended her for retention, there is no indication that she would have been retained as there is no evidence her continued presence in the military would have been consistent with Air Force interest in maintaining proper discipline, good order, leadership, and morale as required by Air Force Instruction 36-3208. 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 her request was not approved. The DRB results were approved by the board president on 13 Sep 2020. 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)