ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01615

	COUNSEL: YES

	HEARING: NOT INDICATED

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His discharge Under Honorable Conditions (General) be upgraded to Honorable, and his narrative reason for separation be changed from “Misconduct (Minor Infractions)” to “Secretarial Authority.”

RESUME OF THE CASE:

On 26 Aug 15, the Board considered and denied a request from the applicant.  For an accounting of the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision, see the AFBCMR Record of Proceedings at Exhibit K.

On 7 Nov 17, through counsel, the applicant requested reconsideration of his request to upgrade his discharge to honorable.  He contends that in his previous submission, he was too ashamed to disclose that he had been severely traumatized during Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) training.  The Board should consider an upgrade to his discharge based on the mitigating circumstances of his Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) brought on by the physical and mental trauma at the hands of his SERE instructors.  Furthermore, he fought relentlessly to overcome the trauma endured and worked tirelessly to become a model member of his community through his successful post-service educational pursuits and community service.  Finally, the Board should consider an upgrade based on clemency, as suggested by the AFBCMR medical consultant.  He strives to bring value to his community and his misconduct is not representative of his character.  In support of his request, he provides several character reference letters, educational degrees, and certificates/awards.  Additionally, his counsel highlights that under Title 10 any petition for an upgrade discharge requires a review by a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit L.

Clarifying guidance memoranda with regard to discharge upgrade requests due to mental health conditions are at Exhibit M. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFBCMR Psychiatric Advisor finds sufficient evidence to indicate that only some of the applicant’s misconduct, resulting in his administrative separation, should possibly be mitigated by his claimed mental health condition.  The applicant has been previously denied a request for upgrade by Air Force Discharge Review Board and the AFBCMR. With each appeal, applicant’s contentions in support of upgrade have varied.  In the current appeal, applicant claims that his misconduct was due to PTSD that he developed following SERE training.  Counsel states the applicant was subjected to a training regime that included sensory deprivation, physical beatings, interrogations, sleeping in his own excrement, being stripped naked, as well as psychological and physical torture.  The physical beatings and sleeping in excrement are not consistent with the contemporary protocol of the training and are unlikely; however, not impossible.  

His only encounter with behavioral health was during his (Department of Veterans Affairs) compensation and pension evaluation.  However, addressing the applicant’s implicit desire for an upgrade of discharge characterization based on liberal consideration, this Psychiatric Advisor concurs with the argument that the applicant’s alcohol abuse could possibly have a nexus with his psychological distress.  Of note, the extract from the psychological advisory indicates that the applicant first drank at the age of nine (predating military service).  However, finding the connection between the applicant’s failure to refrain from visiting the dorm room of a permanent party member and not wearing required blues uniform is more challenging.

The complete advisory is at Exhibit N.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 13 Sep 18 for comment (Exhibit O), and the applicant’s counsel replied on 17 Oct 18.  In his response, the applicant states he is reluctant to go to the Department of Veterans Affairs because of the lack of concern over his case.  Furthermore, the alcohol assessment from 9 years ago was incorrect and invalid.  The assessor skewed his responses.  In the Latino culture, a sip of beer as a child at a family festivity is normal.  His only goal is to upgrade his discharge status so he can go on with his life.  The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit P.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.   After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, the Board remains unconvinced the evidence presented demonstrates an error or injustice and therefore finds no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.  The Board agrees with the previous Board decision that denied the applicant’s request based on the merits of the case.  While the Board notes the AFBCMR Psychiatric Advisor finds sufficient evidence to indicate some of the applicant’s misconduct should possibly be mitigated by his claimed mental health condition, the Board agrees with the Psychiatric Advisor that finding a nexus between his mental health condition and the applicant’s failure to refrain from visiting the dorm room and wearing the appropriate uniform is challenging.  The Board reviewed the case based on recent liberal consideration guidance, and even though the applicant has been diagnosed with PTSD by the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Board found the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence to support his contention of a nexus between his SERE training, PTSD, and subsequent misconduct.  Therefore, the Board finds the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion, and was not unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  Finally, in the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency, but finds no basis to do so.  We agree with the previous Board decision that the applicant’s post-service activities do not overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2014-01615-2 in Executive Session on 1 Nov 18:

Panel Chair
Panel Member
Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit K:	Original Record of Proceedings, w/ Exhibits A-J, signed 3 Sep 15.
Exhibit L:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 7 Nov 17.
Exhibit M:	Miscellaneous Documents, Clarifying Guidance, various dates.
Exhibit N:	Advisory, AFBCMR Psychiatric Advisor, dated 2 Aug 18.
Exhibit O:	Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 13 Sep 18.
Exhibit P:	Letter, Counsel Office, w/atch, dated 17 Oct 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings of Docket Number BC-2014-01615-2 required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.