AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00636	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 23 June 2010 with a Bad Conduct Discharge after being convicted of a drug-related offense during a Special Court-Martial.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization and a change to the discharge narrative reason.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 29 March 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.  

Through counsel the applicant contended his discharge was inequitable as his misconduct was the result of a chronic adjustment disorder he developed as a result of in-service stressors.  While deployed to the UAE the applicant witnessed a man jump off a bridge and commit suicide.  Upon return from the deployment the applicant began to experience the initial stages of chronic adjustment disorder as a result of witnessing this traumatic event.  He claimed he started to self-medicate with alcohol instead of seeking medical treatment to numb himself from his symptoms.  He continued to use alcohol and had at least one documented alcohol related incident.  At this time he was also experiencing sleep problems associated with his condition.  He was later transferred to the night shift which only exacerbated his sleep issues.  He admits to using methamphetamines as a mechanism to help him be alert for night shift work and to perform better.  

Prompted by changes in his demeanor his unit suspected drug use and ordered a urinalysis, which he tested positive for methamphetamines.  After the positive urinalysis the applicant decided to seek medical treatment for his condition and was diagnosed with Adjustment Disorder with Anxiety and Depression.  Counsel argued the Air Force was aware of the applicant’s alcohol and drug abuse problem as a result of his mental health condition and should have found him medically unfit and considered him for medical board separation.  Furthermore, counsel argued that had the applicant been afforded the opportunity to attend more intense treatment under revised changes in the current ADAPT Program he likely would not have resorted to drug use.  Counsel asserted the applicant had an otherwise exemplary career and has completely turned his life around since his discharge and has fought hard to manage and overcome his mental health condition.    

A review of the record revealed the applicant tested positive twice for methamphetamines.  He was prosecuted at a Special Court-martial where he pled guilty, and was found guilty.  He was sentenced by a military judge to reduction to E-1, forfeitures of pay, confinement for 5 months, and a Bad Conduct Discharge.  

LIBERAL CONSIDERATION:

Due to evidence of a mental health condition found in the applicant’s medical record, the Board considered the case based on the liberal consideration (LC) standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and 10 USC §1553.  The Board included a member who is a clinical psychologist/psychiatrist.  Specifically, the Board reviewed the four questions the Under Secretary of Defense provided that boards should consider when weighing evidence in requests for modification of discharges due in whole or in part to mental health conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI); sexual assault, and sexual harassment.  The Board considered the following: 

1. Did the veteran contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant, through counsel, contends “his discharge was based on misconduct which occurred as a result of chronic adjustment disorder which he developed as a result of in service stressors.”

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
Based on the available records, there is no indication the applicant reported or exhibited any mental health symptoms or sought any mental health treatment prior to his positive drug screen. Based on the available records, the applicant continued to use methamphetamine after his release from incarceration and there is no evidence the applicant sought mental health treatment after his release from incarceration. There is evidence the applicant was diagnosed with adjustment disorder during his time in service related during his transition to incarceration. There is evidence the applicant was diagnosed with Alcohol abuse, and Amphetamine abuse during his time in service. 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant received a bad conduct discharge due to multiple incidents of methamphetamine use, including methamphetamine use on duty. There is evidence the applicant was referred to ADAPT after his positive drug screen and received counseling service while he was incarcerated. There is no evidence the applicant’s performance during his time in service was impaired or impacted by a mental health condition.  There is no evidence the applicant’s mental health condition mitigated or excused the misconduct that led to his discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated or excused, the applicant’s discharge is not outweighed.

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) and paragraphs
(7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum and did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.

The board determined there was no objective evidence to support the applicant’s claim that he used drugs to self-medicate his symptoms.  Additionally, there is no evidence that the applicant was not afforded the proper level of care while in the Air Force.  He chose to not relay the level of severity of his symptoms until after he was found to have used drugs.  After his drug use was discovered he was diagnosed with an Adjustment Disorder, however the condition was not found to be unfitting.  Therefore the DRB found no merit with the applicant’s contention regarding his level of care and his discharge was both proper and equitable given his egregious misconduct.

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 characterization of service shall remain, the narrative reason for separation shall remain, and the reentry code shall remain.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 1 April 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)