AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00574	
					
The applicant was discharged on 21 May 2015 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a Bad conduct Discharge for Court Martial (other).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to General/Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 5 Nov 2020.  

The applicant was discharged on 21 May 2015 with a Bad Conduct Discharge after being convicted of a drug-related offense during a Special Court-Martial.

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 General/Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C.

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:  Absent from place of Duty.

The applicant and counsel state that the members job performance was severely impacted by trauma related symptoms stemming from an instance of MST he suffered while stationed in Korea. They state that in addition, the member has received further trauma related symptoms relating to experiences during a deployment. They go on to state that the trauma related symptoms from the MST and deployment negatively impacted his work performance and his mental health and are mitigating factors in the conduct that led to his bad conduct discharge. They state that the member’s exemplary pre-MST and post-service record and the fact that the member’s misconduct was non-violent, both support a case for granting the member a second chance.   

Upon review of an applicant’s Bad Conduct Discharge as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, the DRB may change the punitive discharge to an administrative discharge for the purposes of clemency, if warranted.  The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request. The applicant’s mental health records found no MST or trauma related to his deployment. There was no evidence he was diagnosed with PTSD or similar symptoms in service that impacted his decision to use drugs. The board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his military service.  The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate.
 
CONCLUSION:  After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found no conclusive indication that any mental health issues had a direct impact on the applicant's misconduct or discharge.  The DRB concluded the applicant’s punitive discharge by a Special Court-Martial was appropriate based on the facts and circumstances of the case and there was no sufficient basis, as an act of clemency, to change the discharge.
 
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)