AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00074	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 6 September 2007 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Under Other Than Honorable (UOTHC) discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of the discharge characterization and a change to the discharge narrative reason.

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’s record of service included an Article 15.  Her misconduct included:  making false representations; failure to follow orders, disobeying a no-contact order, destruction of personal property, and wrongful use of methamphetamines.    

The applicant contended her UOTHC discharge stemmed from Military Sexual Trauma.

Upon review of the applicant’s service record, the board was not able to find any documentation regarding the discharge.  The evidence that was available indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for various disciplinary infractions and misconduct to include wrongful use of methamphetamines and falsifying her enlistment documents by failing to disclose prior service drug use.  

The applicant was under mental health treatment due to adjustment difficulties, depressed mood, and anxiety resulting from an assault.  She attempted suicide and was deemed high risk.  The mental health providers declared her condition so severe that it significantly impacted her ability to serve in the Air Force and recommended she be discharged.  The evidence indicated the applicant’s unit considered court-martial for the applicant’s misconduct, but in light of her psychiatric hospitalization the command elected against court-martial and chose to administratively discharge her. The applicant waived her right to an administrative discharge board hearing.

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.  Because the Applicant’s claim was based in whole or in part on sexual trauma, intimate partner violence, or spousal abuse, the Board obtained a review by a psychiatrist, psychologist, or social worker with training on mental health issues associated with military sexual trauma.  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 contended the misconduct that led to her discharge stemmed from MST. 

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
There is evidence the applicant’s command and medical providers were aware of the applicant’s MST experience during her time in service.  Based on the available records, there is evidence the applicant sought mental health treatment after her positive drug test and continued with mental health treatment until her discharge, receiving the diagnosis of Adjustment Disorder with anxiety and depressed mood. 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge?
Liberal consideration does not apply to the Article 83 violation for knowingly making false representations that she never used methamphetamine before her enlistment.  This is a pre-service finding that is excluded from liberal consideration. 

Based on review of the available records, the applicant’s contended experience of MST occurred in/around January 2007.  There is evidence the applicant’s pattern of misconduct began after this time period.  The applicant submitted evidence from her mental health provider during her time in service that indicated the applicant was experiencing marked distress related to her assault and pending legal problems.  There is also evidence the applicant’s experience of MST and her mental health condition, were considered during the applicant’s discharge process and may have mitigated her discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Although there is evidence the applicant’s experience of MST and her mental health condition may have mitigated her discharge, there is insufficient evidence the applicant’s discharge is outweighed.  The applicant was discharged due to misconduct and drug abuse.  Although the misconduct may have been mitigated by the applicant’s experience of MST, the applicant’s drug use, and falsification of use, occurred prior to the applicant’s experience of MST and there is no established nexus between the applicant’s drug use and her experience of MST.  Thus 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.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade the discharge characterization to Honorable and to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority.  The DRB also voted unanimously to deny changing 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 Under Other Than Honorable Conditions, 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 6 June 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)