AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00377	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 15 May 2014 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization.

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 an Article 15 and multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling.  His misconduct included:  wrongful use of marijuana and other controlled substances, failure to go, disrespect towards an NCO, and dereliction of duty.  

The applicant contended that he was both sexually harassed and sexually assaulted during Basic Military Training and technical training.  He claimed that he was falsely accused of acting inappropriately in front of a female that led to a lengthy investigation.  He also contended the stress of the harassment and assaults, as well as the investigation, led to him to use drugs.  He claimed he currently overindulges in alcohol to manage his stress. 

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he had multiple incidents of misconduct while attending technical training, including failure to go, losing his ID card, utilizing another Airman’s ID card, underage drinking and wrongful use of marijuana and other controlled substances.  His misconduct resulted in multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling and punishment under Article 15, UCMJ.  He waived his right to submit a statement in response to his discharge notification.

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 for “PTSD” and “sexual assault/harassment” on his application.  The applicant contended he smoked marijuana at times so the pain and stress of being under investigation for sexual assault would go away.  This led to him not passing a drug test in the military and getting discharged.  The applicant also contended the constant sexual harassment he endured led him to not be the hero he wanted to be for his country.  He admitted he currently overindulges in alcohol to manage the stresses and horrific things he had to do with other men while in the service.

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

There is evidence the applicant was medically referred to ADAPT after a drug screen returned positive results for marijuana during the applicant’s Emergency Room visit for suspected overuse of dextromethorphan.  Based on a review of the applicant’s records, the applicant’s ADAPT case was terminated after he refused to participate in counseling services.  There was no evidence the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD during his time in service.  There is also no evidence or records the applicant exhibited any clinically significant features of PTSD during his time in service.  The applicant provided written testimony that he experienced sexual harassment during his time in service.  Aside from the applicant as the offender, there is no reference to sexual harassment in any other available record.  The applicant did not provide any clarifying information about his sexual harassment experience and did not provide any clarifying details about his experience such as when the experience occurred, and how it impacted his mental health and overall functioning in the military.  Furthermore, there is no evidence or records, and the applicant did not submit any substantiating evidence, that he was, or made known that he perceived to be, a victim of sexual harassment during his time in service.

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

The applicant’s contentions are contradictory to the information in the applicant’s service records.  Based on the applicant’s records, the applicant incurred multiple disciplinary infractions for substance misuse and other disciplinary infractions during his brief time in service.  There is no evidence the applicant exhibited any clinically significant features of PTSD or any other mental health condition, during his time in service.  There is also no evidence a mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct that led to the applicant’s discharge.  Finally, there is no evidence that the residual effects of the applicant’s experience of sexual harassment would excuse or mitigate the 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.
 
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 and medical records, 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 November 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)