AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00154	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 27 February 2009 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization and a change to the discharge narrative reason.

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 for wrongful use of marijuana.  

The applicant contended she was harassed and treated differently because she was a gay woman serving before Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policies were removed from the military.  She claimed she was in constant fear for her personal safety and her career.  She also stated in her application that she experimented with alcohol and marijuana prior to joining the Air Force due to problems she was experiencing in her life.  She further stated that after her sexuality was revealed members in her unit harassed her and put undue stress on her and she turned to marijuana to cope.  Since her discharge she has been seeking mental health treatment and claimed she no longer uses drugs.

A review of the record revealed the applicant admitted to using marijuana after someone she used with turned her in.  She was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for the misconduct and administratively discharged.  She submitted her VA disability rating letter and has been rated at 50% for bi-polar disorder.

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 “PTSD,” “Other mental health,” and “DADT.”  The applicant contended she was sexually harassed and treated differently because she was a gay woman who served before the end of the DADT policye.  She also claimed she was in constant fear for her personal safety as well as her career.  DADT policies are not considered under the intent of liberal consideration.  However, the applicant contended she was sexually harassed and this contention was considered under the intent of liberal consideration.  

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health treatment during her brief time in service.  There is no evidence the applicant exhibited any significant clinical features of PTSD, or any other mental health condition, during her time in service.

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge?
The applicant was discharged due to drug use.  The applicant submitted VA medical records of care obtained 13 years post discharge to substantiate her claim.  Based on the available evidence and records, the applicant’s mental health conditions as likely as not developed post-service.  There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health treatment during her time in service nor is there any evidence the applicant exhibited any clinically significant indicators of a mental health condition during her time in service. 

Regarding the applicant’s concurrence with her VA diagnoses, 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 had a mental health condition that caused or mitigated the misconduct which led to her discharge.  

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 and 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, the narrative reason for separation shall remain, and the reentry code shall remain.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 1 August 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)