RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2020-00669

XXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

Her Under Honorable Conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to Honorable.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

She was told that she would receive a medical discharge and she needs at least zero percent in order to receive mental health and housing benefits.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force airman basic (E-1).

On 22 Feb 02, according to DD Form 2807, Report of Medical History, the applicant indicated she had attended three Alcoholic Anonymous (AA) classes for minors in possession (MIP) of alcohol in March 2000 at the age 17 and revealed alcohol abuse.

On 26 Feb 02 the applicant entered active duty.

On 24 Apr 03, the applicant’s commander issued the applicant Article 15, Nonjudicial Punishment for consuming alcoholic beverages while being under the legal drinking age, making a false official statement, and leaving the scene of an accident as the driver of a vehicle in the accident.  She received a reduction to the grade of airman basic, forfeiture of $100 pay per month for two months, suspended, restriction to the base and 30 days extra duty.

On 21 Jul 03, the applicant received a general discharge with narrative reason, “Alcohol Rehabilitation Failure,” and credited with 1 year, 4 months and 26 days of active service.

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

POST-SERVICE INFORMATION

On 10 Mar 20, the Board sent the applicant a request for post-service information, including a standard criminal history report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); however, she has not replied.

AUTHORITY 

According to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, incorporating changes through 8 June 2017, paragraph 1.18, the types of service characterization are as follows: 

Honorable.  The quality of the airman’s service generally has met Air Force standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty or when a member's service is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate. 

Under Honorable Conditions (General).  If an airman’s service has been honest and faithful, this characterization is warranted when significant negative aspects of the airman's conduct or performance of duty outweigh positive aspects of the airman's military record.

On 3 Sep 14, the Secretary of Defense issued a memorandum providing guidance to military correction boards regarding liberal consideration for Vietnam veterans claiming Post Traumatic Stress Disorder PTSD (Hagel Memo).  In addition, time limits to reconsider decisions would be liberally waived for applications covered by this guidance. 

Subsequent guidance expanded liberal consideration protections to include all veterans who requested a modification of their discharge, to include character of service, narrative reason for discharge and reenlistment code, due in whole or in part to any mental health condition rather than just PTSD or Traumatic Brain Injury, and included those veterans who were victims of sexual assault or sexual harassment.  Liberal consideration would be given to veterans petitioning for discharge relief when the application for relief is based in whole or in part on the aforementioned conditions.

Under Consideration of Mitigating Factors, it is noted that PTSD is not a likely cause of premeditated misconduct.  Correction Boards will exercise caution in weighing evidence of mitigation in all cases of misconduct by carefully considering the likely causal relationship of symptoms to the misconduct.  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.

Boards are directed to consider the following main questions when assessing requests due to mental health conditions including PTSD, TBI, sexual assault, or sexual harassment:

a. Did the veteran have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge?
b. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service?
c. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
d. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge?

Copies of all guidance memoranda can be found at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

BCMR Psychological Advisor finds insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s request.  Liberal consideration is not applied to the applicant’s request as her condition is considered pre-existing and is exempt under this policy.  If the Board still chooses to apply liberal consideration to the applicant’s petition, she did have a mental health condition of alcohol dependency and possibly, but unconfirmed, Adjustment Disorder and personality traits in service, but these conditions are considered unsuiting for service and would mitigate her misconduct but would not excuse her discharge.

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 2 Apr 20 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not timely filed.

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

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of the BCMR Psychological Advisor and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions. The Board did not consider liberal consideration in their decision as the applicant’s condition is considered pre-existing and is exempt under the policy. In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency and in the absence of post-service information, the Board finds no basis to do so.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s record at this time.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

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-2020-00669 in Executive Session on 16 Dec 20:

Panel Chair
Panel Member
Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 19 Dec 19.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Notification of Clarifying Guidance and Clemency, dated 10 Mar 20.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, BCMR Psychological Advisor, dated 16 Mar 20.
Exhibit E:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 2 Apr 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.