AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00136	

SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 16 June 2021 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (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’s record of service included an Article 15 for wrongful use of marijuana.  

The applicant contended he was diagnosed with a mental health illness and that his actions were not uncalled for.  He requested an upgrade in order to be eligible for VA benefits.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he tested positive for marijuana during random drug urinalysis testing.  Since his discharge, the applicant had been diagnosed by the VA for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) with cannabis use disorder and given a 70% disability rating post-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 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 contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant checked the box for “other mental health” on his application and stated he would like a change to his discharge because he felt, with his diagnosed mental illnesses, his actions were not uncalled for.

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health treatment during his time in service.  A review of the applicant’s records revealed he received the diagnoses of Major Depression, single episode, moderate, which was later changed to Adjustment Disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood after psychological testing revealed exaggeration of symptoms and likely feigning for secondary gain. 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
Based on review of the applicant’s records, there is evidence the applicant’s Chain of Command was aware of the applicant’s mental health condition prior to and during his discharge process.  Per records review, the applicant’s Commander and First Sergeant were participants in the applicant’s treatment team with the mental health clinic.  The applicant’s Commander stated, in the recommendation for discharge he considered the range of available service characterizations and determined the applicant had not lived up to Air Force standards, therefore, an honorable service characterization was not appropriate.  However, after considering the applicant’s age, work ethic, leadership, and positive attitude, the Commander believed a General service characterization was appropriate and did not believe the misconduct rose to the level of an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) characterization.  A review of the records also indicated the applicant made it known to his Command and his mental health providers that he did not want to be in the military and expressed a direct desire to be separated.  The applicant’s primary mental health provider opined the applicant’s drug use was not related to a mental health condition.  There is no evidence of a nexus between the applicant’s in-service mental health conditions and the misconduct for which he was discharged. 

The applicant submitted, with his application, a document stating he is VA rated for MDD with cannabis use disorder and residuals of closed non-displaced left radius fracture.  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.  At the “snapshot in time” of the applicant’s service, there is no evidence the applicant’s mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct which led to the applicant’s 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) and  (7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum and did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.  Therefore, the DRB found the applicant’s contention without merit.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The DRB also voted unanimously to deny changing the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority and 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, the narrative reason for separation shall remain, and the reentry code shall remain.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 21 July 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)