AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00048	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 2 May 2007 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant was represented by counsel.    

The applicant requested the board be completed based on a records only review.

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.  

The applicant’s record of service included a Special Court-Martial Order. Her misconduct included: Wrongful use of Methamphetamine Plea: G. Finding: G.; falsely claimed upon enlistment that she had never experimented, used, or possessed any illegal drug or narcotic, when in fact she used Methamphetamine numerous times prior to enlistment Plea: G. Finding: G.; Possession of drug paraphernalia Plea: G. Finding: G.

The applicant through counsel stated that she experienced sexual assault as well as difficult deployments during her time in service. They explained that this caused her to spiral into depression and subsequently attempt suicide on two separate occasions. They explained that the member did receive some mental health care for an unrelated issue, but she did not receive the appropriate treatment needed to address the MST. They also stated that her commanders swept the sexual assault under the rug. They explained that she suffered in silence for years and eventually attempted to self-medicate with methamphetamines. They concluded that she served her time, which was appropriate, but a General discharge was an injustice that disrespected her service. Although not flawless, the positive aspects of her service greatly outweighed the infraction.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. There was no evidence in the records to indicate the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance for illegal drug use. It concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions she made during her Air Force career. The board determined that the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate. 
  
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 physician, clinical psychologist, or 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 have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

The applicant through counsel contended that she experienced sexual assault as well as difficult deployments during her time in service. They explained that this caused her to spiral into depression and subsequently attempt suicide on two separate occasions. They explained that the member did receive some mental health care for an unrelated issue, but she did not receive the appropriate treatment needed to address the MST.  

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

The applicant’s and counsel’s claims are contradictory to the evidence in the applicant’s military records and the applicant’s statements at the time of the investigation subsequent to the applicant’s positive drug test. There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health treatment intermittently during her time in service.  There is evidence the applicant was receiving mental health services prior to her experience of MST and after.  

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

Liberal consideration does not apply to the Article 83 charge and conviction: the applicant pled guilty to “by means of knowingly false representations that she never experimented with, used, or possessed an illegal drug or narcotic, when in fact she had use methamphetamine numerous times before her enlistment, procure herself to be enlisted as an Airman Basic in the United States Air Force and did thereafter, at or near [specified] Air Force based, receive pay and allowances under the enlistment so procured. This is a pre-service condition whose finding is excluded from liberal consideration. 

Based on the available records, there is no evidence of a mitigating nexus between the applicant’s experience of MST or her mental health condition and the misconduct that led to her discharge. While there is evidence the applicant sought and received treatment for a mental health condition in service, there is no evidence that the applicant’s misconduct which included; substance use in service, pre-service use and falsification of statements, was mitigated by the applicant’s mental health condition or MST experience. 

Based on the available records, there is no evidence the applicant was diagnosed with, nor exhibited features indicating a diagnosis of PTSD during her time in service. Per a review of the applicant’s medical records, the applicant was established with VA services less than two years after her discharge.  The VA, operating under a different set of laws than the military, is empowered to offer compensation for any medical or mental health condition with an established nexus to military service, without regard to its impact on a member’s fitness to serve, the narrative reason for release for service, or the length of time that has transpired since the date of discharge. The VA may also conduct periodic reevaluations for the purpose of adjusting the disability rating as the level of impairment from a given condition may improve or worsen over the life of the veteran.

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because the applicant’s condition and experience does not excuse the discharge, it also does not outweigh the discharge. 

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) of this memorandum, and concluded the following with regard to each factor: 

(6)(h).  Requests for relief based in whole or in part on a mental health condition, should be considered for relief on equitable, injustice, or clemency grounds whenever there is insufficient evidence to warrant relief for an error or impropriety.

The applicant requested relief due to MST (Military Sexual Trauma) and difficult deployments. Based on the records, the board was not able to find a nexus between the mental health condition and the misconduct. It also noted that the member had prior service drug use and made a false statement regarding prior drug use during enlistment, which occurred prior to the assault.  

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 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 awarded characterization of service shall remain General, the narrative reason for separation shall remain Misconduct (Drug Abuse), and the reentry code shall remain 2B. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 19 May 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)