AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00086	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 29 January 2010 in accordance with AFI 36-3209 with a General Discharge for Drug Abuse. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization.

The applicant was not 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 requested an upgrade because he needs a certificate of eligibility. He stated that he served for seven years with good attendance. The member explained that towards the end of the enlistment, he went through a lot of mental health issues which was discussed with the First Sergeant. The member continued to explain that he received no offer of help for these issues. The member concluded that he was just told to go home, and months later received the discharge paperwork. 

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. Additionally, there is nothing in the record to indicate the applicant was unaware of the Air Force policy of zero tolerance for illegal drug use. This policy is zero tolerance for Active, Guard, and Reserve members of the Air Force. The Board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his military service. The discharge received was deemed 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 checked the “other mental health” box on his application. The applicant stated in his application “At the end of my enlistment I did go through a lot of mental issues and discuss this with my first Sergeant, I never [unknown] any offer of help I was just told to go home and months later I received my discharge papers. I feel like it not fair that just because I was National Guard I get denied.” 

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

There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health treatment during his time in service. There is no evidence or records the applicant exhibited any clinical significant features of any other mental health condition, during his time in service. The burden of proof is upon the applicant to substantiate his claims. The applicant claimed he was going through a lot of “mental issues” but did not submit any substantiating evidence and did not provide any detail about the severity or impact of his claimed condition. 

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

Per review of the applicant’s record, the applicant was discharged due to drug abuse after testing positive for marijuana during random drug screen. The Air Force’s Drug use policy does not differ between Active duty and Guard/Reserve personnel. Per review of the applicant’s records, he admitted to Security Forces that he smoked marijuana and waived his right to further due process by failing to respond to notifications. There is no evidence or records, nor did the applicant submit any documents to substantiate his claim, that a mental health condition caused or mitigated 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, it is also 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) of this memorandum, and concluded the following with regard to this factor: 

(6)(j).  Similarly situated Service members sometimes receive disparate punishments.  A Service member in one location could face court-martial for an offense that routinely is handled administratively across the Service. While a court-martial or a command would be within its authority to choose a specific disposition forum or issue a certain punishment, DRBs should nevertheless consider uniformity and unfair disparities in punishments as a basis for relief. 

Similarly situated service members, whether they are Active, Guard, or Reserve receive the same punishment. A General discharge is typical for this type of misconduct. The board determined that this character of discharge is not disparate in any way.

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 awarded characterization of service shall remain “General”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Drug Abuse” and the reentry code shall remain 6H. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 17 June 22.  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)