AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2021-00255	
					
The applicant was discharged on 7 Jan 15, 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, and a change to the discharge narrative reason.  The Board was conducted on 14 Sep 21.  

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 her 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.  

The applicant’s record of service included an Article 15.  Her misconduct included:  Wrongfully used Zolpidem; Physically controlled vehicle while impaired by Zolpidem.

Due to evidence of 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.

The applicant and counsel contend that the discharge is inequitable base on liberal consideration in that; she was diagnosed with PTSD in service, and was confirmed likely as not related to her military service by George Mason University Center for Psychological Services. The member and counsel also contend impropriety in that DPANM failed to follow Air Force procedure when it did not refer the member to IDES even though she met the criteria. Lastly the applicant states that there is a clear connection between the her PTSD and the conduct that led to her discharge.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. It found no evidence to indicate the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance for illegal drug use, specifically, in this case, medication not prescribed to her.  The Board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of her military service.  
After a thorough review of the service record and input from the Board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found that some 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. The applicant’s primary diagnosis is an unsuiting condition. While this condition may have caused the misconduct that lead to her discharge, it does not mitigate the discharge. Unsuiting conditions, IAW DoDI 1332.18 and the MSD are subject to administrative discharge if the condition is interfering with duty performance and/or deployability. The applicant was, at times, diagnosed with potentially unfitting conditions, but there is no evidence any of those conditions rose to the level of unfitting at any time in service. Additionally, it is noted that the applicant’s trauma existed prior to service and there is no evidence the resultant poor coping skills and avoidant behaviors were affected or aggravated by the military environment.

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 20 September 2021.  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)