AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00469	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 27 September 2010 with a Bad Conduct Discharge after being convicted of use of cocaine on multiple occasions during a Special Court-Martial. 

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 a Special Court-Martial Order.  His misconduct included: made a false official statement indicating that he had never used cocaine before and wrongfully used cocaine (multiple instances).  

The applicant contended that during his military career, he experienced an extreme amount of anxiety and depression. He stated that he was bullied in BMT due to his orientation, which made things very hard for him. He concluded that since discharge, he has had a successful career as a nurse assistant, but still must check into mental health and rehab to keep on track. 

Upon review of an applicant’s Bad Conduct Discharge as adjudged by a Special Court-Martial, the DRB may change the punitive discharge to an administrative discharge for the purposes of clemency if warranted.  The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and did not find sufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request. The applicant did not provide any evidence to show that his conduct warranted clemency. Additionally, per the Board’s Mental Health Advisor, a nexus between the contended mental health condition and the misconduct could not be found.  The Board found the negative aspects of the applicant’s willful misconduct outweighed the positive aspects of his military service.  The Board deemed the applicant’s discharge characterization to be appropriate.

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 have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

The applicant checked the “other mental health” box on the application. The applicant contended “while I was embarking on my military career I experienced an extreme amount of anxiety and depression. I was also bulled while I was in basic military training because of my sexuality which made things very hard for me.”  

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

There is evidence the applicant received mental health care during his time in service and received the diagnosis of anxiety disorder, unspecified. Limited information was available for review regarding the  mental health care received by the applicant during his time in service.  There is evidence the applicant was command referred to the ADAPT program and received the diagnosis of alcohol abuse.

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

A review of the applicant’s records revealed he was discharged due to misconduct including making a false official statement, and multiple uses of cocaine.  The applicant’s service records reveal a history of pre-service marijuana use. Based on the available evidence in the applicant’s records along with the applicant’s testimony in his application, there is evidence the applicant was having difficulty adjusting to military life and reported experiencing feelings of isolation and limited support. There is evidence the applicant chose to use alcohol and drugs in a way that was incompatible with military service, which may explain the applicant’s drug use, but it does not mitigate the applicant’s misconduct. There is no evidence of a nexus between the applicant’s in-service mental conditions and the misconduct for which he was discharged. 

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 considered the following factors regarding the applicant’s circumstances. 

7d.  Positive or negative post-conviction conduct, including any arrests, criminal charges, or any convictions since the incident at issue;

Post discharge, the applicant had multiple incidents with alcohol including a DWI. Although he attended community service and group therapy, the applicant did not provide evidence that he has since been rehabilitated or has had success in life despite the discharge. Additionally, there is no evidence of atonement for his past misconduct. His post-service conduct does not warrant clemency of his discharge. 

7f.  Length of time since misconduct;

Although it has been 12 years since the discharge, the applicant did not provide any evidence that he has since bounced back, has been rehabilitated, successful, or has since been a positive influence or asset to his community.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason 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 record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge did not warrant clemency. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “Bad Conduct Discharge”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Court Martial (Other)”, and the reentry code shall remain “2L”. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 20 December 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)