AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00362	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 29 May 2009 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Drug Abuse).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility and separation codes.

The applicant was not represented by counsel and 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 multiple Article 15s for underage drinking, wrongful use of medication, false official statements, and dereliction of duty.  

The applicant contended that he was discharged after receiving in service mental health treatment.  He has since been diagnosed by the VA with mental health conditions, Bipolar and Anxiety Disorders, and has a service-connected disability rating. 

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for misusing cough medication to get high.  He also drank underage and made a false official statement about the incident.  Finally, he allowed another Airman to use his credentials to illegally purchase a meal at the base dining facility.  He was subsequently punished a second time under Article 15, UCMJ for underage drinking again.  He submitted a letter with his application from the VA indicating he’s been given a service-connected disability rating. 

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 clinical psychologist.  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.  The applicant contended he was discharged after receiving mental health treatment and is currently service connected for Bipolar Disorder and Anxiety Disorder.

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

There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health services during his time in service.  A review of the applicant’s records revealed the applicant received the diagnoses in service of Adjustment Disorder and bereavement. 

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

The applicant’s records show that the applicant was discharged due to drug abuse.  Based on the applicant’s administrative and medical records, the applicant was referred to mental health subsequent to meeting with his commander regarding misconduct in which the applicant did not deny suicidal ideation related to the recent death of his friend. 

There is no evidence the applicant was discharged after receiving mental health treatment.  A review of the applicant’s mental health records revealed the applicant sought mental health services related to difficulty coping with the death of a friend.  The applicant’s records revealed the applicant requested all medications to be discontinued and to discontinue services because he was feeling better and no longer felt the need for mental health services.  The applicant’s records revealed the applicant’s misconduct began before he sought mental health services and continued after he requested to stop utilizing mental health services.  There is no evidence of a nexus between the applicant’s in service mental health condition and the misconduct that led to his discharge. 
 
The applicant submitted his VA rating as evidence in support of his 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 that led to the applicant’s discharge.  

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because there is no evidence of a mitigating nexus between the applicant’s in service mental health condition and the misconduct that led to his discharge, 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 (7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum and found no evidence of inequity or impropriety.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason and associated separation code 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 and medical records, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service, the narrative reason for separation, and associated separation code, and the reentry code shall not change.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 29 October 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)