AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00146	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 30 March 2015 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization.

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 an Article 15 and multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling.  Her misconduct included:  dereliction of duty, failure to obey a lawful order, disrespect towards an NCO, and wrongful use of prescription drugs.  

The applicant contended she had service connected mental health conditions during her time in the service that were unknown and untreated.  She claimed the VA has found these conditions are debilitating and have determined that, even with proper treatment, she is permanently unemployable.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed she tested positive for hydrocodone and hydromorphone during random urinalysis testing.  A review of her medical record determined she was not authorized to use either of these substances.  For the misconduct the unit punished her under Article 15, UCMJ.  She stated in her response to the Article 15 that she did not knowingly ingest these drugs and alluded to perhaps she had been drugged at a party that she attended prior to the urinalysis.  The applicant also had multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling in her record for miscellaneous misconduct to include failure to follow orders and disrespect towards an NCO.  The applicant submitted a copy of her VA disability rating letter and she has been rated at 90%.

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 boxes on the application for “other mental health” and “sexual assault/harassment.”  The applicant contended she had service connected mental health conditions which were present during her time of service and were unknown and untreated.  These conditions have been found to be debilitating by the VA and even with proper long term treatment she is permanently unemployable.

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
The applicant contended service connected mental health conditions were present during her time of service and were unknown and untreated.  There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health treatment during her time in service.  Based on a review of the applicant’s military medical records there is evidence the applicant received mental health services beginning in March 2014 for symptoms of depression and anxiety.  There is evidence the applicant received the diagnoses, in service, of adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood, major depressive disorder, dysthymic disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and borderline personality disorder.  Per review of the records, there is evidence the applicant reported her symptoms of depression and anxiety began as early as the seventh grade.  There is no evidence of service aggravation, therefore, based on the available evidence the applicant’s depression and anxiety existed prior to service.  

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant was discharged due to drug abuse.  Per review of the applicant’s medical and administrative records, the applicant provided contradictory information regarding her mental health history and substance abuse history.  The applicant’s records suggest the applicant appropriately sought and received mental health treatment during her time in service.  The presence of mental health conditions, in and of itself, does not mitigate misconduct.  In the applicant’s response to her Article 15, she denied using drugs, and denied any knowledge of how she tested positive for illicit, and unauthorized, substances.  There is no evidence of a nexus between the applicant’s in-service mental health conditions and the misconduct for which she was discharged.  There is no evidence, nor did the applicant contend, she was self-medicating a mental health condition with illicit, unauthorized, substances.  Per review of the applicant’s records, she hypothesized that she may have received the drugs at a party but denied knowingly using the drugs.
 
The applicant submitted VA documents in support of her claim.  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.  Therefore, the DRB found the applicant’s contention without merit.  

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because the applicant’s condition does not mitigate her discharge, it does not outweigh her 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) and (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 her 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 28 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)