RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2019-04242

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING REQUESTED: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

His actions while on active duty did not rise to the regulatory requirement for the character of service he received as provided in Air Force regulations.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former airman first class (E-3) who served in the Regular Air Force.

On 23 Apr 14, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen  for misconduct: minor disciplinary infractions.  The commander recommended the applicant’s discharge be characterized as general (under honorable conditions).

On 23 Apr 14, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and after consulting with counsel, on 28 Apr 14, he provided a statement for the discharge authority’s consideration requesting that the discharge be characterized as honorable as opposed to general.

On 3 May 14, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged, the discharge would be characterized as general (under honorable conditions), and the applicant was not a suitable candidate for, and would not be offered, probation and rehabilitation.

On 9 May 14, the applicant was discharged with a general (under honorable conditions) character of service.  His narrative reason for separation is Misconduct (Minor Infractions) and he was credited with 2 years, 1 month, and 7 days of active service.

On 21 Sep 17, the applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) to upgrade his discharge to honorable.  On 29 Nov 18, the AFDRB concluded that the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved.  The board further concluded that the applicant’s mental health condition was a mitigating factor to the applicant’s misconduct; however, it could not completely explain or excuse the misconduct sufficiently to warrant upgrading the discharge.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY

On 3 Sep 14, the Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum providing guidance to the Military Department Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records as they carefully consider each petition regarding discharge upgrade requests by veterans claiming PTSD.  In addition, time limits to reconsider decisions will be liberally waived for applications covered by this guidance.

On 25 Aug 17, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness (USD P&R) issued clarifying guidance to Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records considering requests by veterans for modification of their discharges due in whole or in part to mental health conditions [PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), sexual assault, or sexual harassment].  Liberal consideration will be given to veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on the aforementioned conditions.

Currently, service members diagnosed with mental health conditions receive heightened screening to ensure the causal relationship of possible symptoms and discharge basis is fully considered, and characterization of service is appropriate.  Veterans discharged under prior procedures, or before verifiable diagnosis, may not have suffered an error because the separation authority was unaware of their condition or experience at the time of discharge.  However, when compared to similarly situated individuals under current standards, they may be the victim of injustice because commanders fully informed of such conditions and causal relationships today may opt for a less prejudicial discharge to ensure the veteran retains certain benefits, such as medical care.

Liberal consideration does not mandate an upgrade.  Relief may be appropriate, however, for minor misconduct commonly associated with the aforementioned mental health conditions and some significant misconduct sufficiently justified or outweighed by the facts and circumstances.

On 25 Jul 18, the USD P&R issued further guidance with the intent to set clear standards.

Copies of the Liberal Consideration guidance memoranda can be found at Exhibit B.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The AFBCMR Medical Advisor finds the evidence sufficient to give “liberal consideration” for an upgrade of discharge characterization.  The Medical Advisor took note of the applicant’s difficult upbringing and his enthusiastic desire to serve, and lacking some nurturing, acceptance, or mentorship after arriving at his first base of assignment.  While the physical assault may have been mitigated by the combined effects of a prescribed medication, plus that of alcohol, there were remaining infractions that likely would have met legal sufficiency for administrative discharge.  Moreover, the escalation of any anxiety and depressed mood disturbance appear to have occurred after knowledge of impending loss of his military career and a means of self-support [a job and place to live] after leaving military service.  The Board should, nevertheless, exercise “liberal consideration” in upgrading the applicant’s discharge characterization to honorable.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP2SSR recommends denying the application.  Based on a review of the applicant’s request and his master personnel record, there is no error or injustice.  Documentation in the applicant’s master personnel record shows that the commander and base discharge authority determined that the significant negative aspects of the applicant’s behavior outweighed any positive aspects of his brief military career.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 3 Jun 20 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

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

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is the victim of an injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale of the BCMR Psychiatric Advisor and finds that a preponderance of the evidence substantiates the applicant’s contentions.  While the Board finds no error in the original discharge process, they recommend relief based on liberal consideration due to the applicant’s PTSD diagnosis.  Therefore, the Board recommends the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

RECOMMENDATION

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his discharge on 9 May 2014, be amended to reflect he was honorably discharged with a narrative reason of “Secretarial Authority” and a corresponding separation code of “JFF,” and that he be furnished an honorable discharge certificate.

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-2019-04242 in Executive Session on 25 Jun 20:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 13 Aug 19.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Medical Advisor, dated 29 May 20.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSR, dated 2 Jun 20.
Exhibit E:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 3 Jun 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.