AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00558	
					
The applicant was discharged on 4 Jun 2008 in accordance with AFI 36-3209 with a General discharge for 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.  The board was conducted on 22 Oct 2020.  

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.    

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553, the board included a member who is a psychiatrist/ psychologist with training on mental health issues connected with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI), and training on mental health disorders.

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 2C / 3K.

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.  

Due to evidence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) military, sexual trauma and mental health conditions found in the applicant’s medical record, the board considered the case based on the liberal consideration standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and/or 10 USC §1553.

Member and/or counsel contended impropriety. They state that she was a victim of sexual assault by three soldiers after they slipped a drug into her drink. They go on to say that the applicant failed urinalysis for THC shortly thereafter and was processed for discharge. They state that the applicant’s chain of command made a material error of discretion regarding discharge. They state that at the time of her drug use and subsequent discharge, the applicant was clearly struggling from the effects of PTSD from her sexual assault. They go on to say that it was not properly diagnosed or treated at the time of separation. They state that according to her licensed clinical social worker, the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD and obsessive compulsive disorder upon her initial evaluation in 2013 and in 2016 she reported she believed she had been sexually assaulted while in the air force. They state that the unit should have done more to educate her on how to report what happened to her and clearly she didn’t feel safe reporting the incident to her chain or unit’s SAPR rep and likely didn’t know that the reporting process what an option. The member states that she in a memo that she did not report the incident to her superiors because she was afraid that she would not be believed and she was embarrassed. She goes on to say that as a result, she developed inappropriate coping skills and starting drinking excessively. Member then states that a long term relationship ended prior to a drill weekend and she smoke marijuana.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request. The board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of her military service. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate.

After a thorough review of the service record and input from the board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found that some of the applicant’s mental health condition was a mitigating factor to the applicant's misconduct, however, it could not completely explain or excuse the misconduct sufficiently to warrant upgrading the discharge.

If the applicant can provide additional information to substantiate her contentions, the board recommends she exercise the right to make a personal appearance before the DRB or directly appeal the DRB’s decision to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.   

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 10 Nov 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)