RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2020-01359

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His uncharacterized discharge be changed to an honorable or other than honorable discharge [sic]. 

His Reentry (RE) code “2C” which denotes “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge; or entry level separation without characterization of service” be changed to a code that makes him eligible to reenlist.

His separation code of “KFF” which denotes “Secretarial Authority” be changed to a code that makes him eligible to reenlist. 

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

During technical school, he had family issues that caused him to fear for his family’s safety.  He requested leave; however, it was denied.  He decided to leave the Air Force because his wife was talking about “a mother-committed suicide.”  He requested a family hardship discharge and it was also denied.  An entry level separation was his only option.  He has since resolved his family issues and now wants to serve his country.  In 2019, he received a Business Management Master’s degree and has been employed with a CPA (Certified Public Accountant) firm since Feb 18.  He plans to enlist in the Air Force or Naval Reserve and was informed his discharge and RE codes needs to be upgraded in order to reenlist.  In support of his request, the applicant’s provides a letter dated 18 Feb 20, from his congressional representative stating the applicant attested to a traumatic family dispute that resulted in his discharge from the military.  At the time, the applicant felt that separation to give full attention to the problem was his only remedy.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force airman first class.  

On 3 Jan 17, the applicant entered active duty.  On 16 Jun 17, the applicant’s commander recommended 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.  The specific reason for the action was on 17 May 17, a Behavioral Analysis Service (BAS) clinical psychology provider and a BAS clinical psychologist, diagnosed the applicant with an adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety and depressed mood.  It was their opinion the applicant’s mental health condition was so severe that his ability to function effectively in the military environment was significantly impaired.  As a result, he was removed from training and recommended for administrative discharge in accordance with current policy guidelines.

On 16 Jun 17, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the discharge notification and waived his right to consult counsel and submitted a statement for consideration.  On 11 Jun 17, [sic] the discharge action was found legally sufficient, and on 24 Jul 17, the discharge authority approved the recommendation.

On 28 Jul 17, the applicant received an entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service after serving 6 months and 26 days of active duty.  His RE code is “2C.”  His narrative reason for separation was “Adjustment Disorder” with the corresponding separation code of “JFY.” 

On 11 Mar 19, the Discharge Review Board (DRB) changed the applicant’s narrative reason for separation from “Adjustment Disorder” to “Secretarial Authority” with the corresponding separation code of “KFF.”  However, the DRB denied the applicant’s requests to upgrade his discharge characterization and to change his RE code to 3K, which denotes “Secretarial Authority.”

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

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY

According to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, incorporating changes through 8 Jun 17, 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.

Under Other than Honorable Conditions.  When basing the reason for separation on a pattern of behavior or one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of airmen.  The member must have an opportunity for a hearing by an administrative discharge board or request discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial.  

Entry Level Separation.  Airmen are in entry level status during the first 180 days of continuous active military service or the first 180 days of continuous active military service after a break of more than 92 days of active service.  Determine the member's status by the date of notification; thus, if the member is in entry level status when initiating the separation action, describe it as an entry level separation unless: 

A service characterization of under other than honorable conditions is authorized under the reason for discharge and is warranted by the circumstances of the case; or 

The Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case-by-case basis, that characterization as honorable is clearly warranted by unusual circumstances of personal conduct and performance of military duty.  

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 Board guidance memoranda are at Exhibit H.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP2SSR recommends denying the applicant’s request to change his character of service.  Airmen are in entry level status during the first 180 days of continuous active military service.  The Department of Defense (DoD) determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. In accordance with AFI 36-3208, paragraph 1.19.1, the status is determined by date of notification. In this case, the applicant was notified of discharge action by the commander on 15 Jun 17, placing the applicant in entry level status since he had been in the service 180 days or less (Date of Entry onto active duty was 3 Jan 17).  There is no error or injustice with the discharge processing.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends denying the applicant’s request to change his RE code.  The applicant received an entry level separation on 28 Jul 17 with an uncharacterized character of service after serving 6 months and 26 days of service.  His RE code was updated to 2C.  Based on the applicant’s entry level separation with an uncharacterized character of service, there is no evidence of an error or injustice.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit D.

The Psychological Advisor finds insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s requests for changes to his records.  The applicant was appropriately diagnosed with an adjustment disorder based on his clinical presentation at the time.  He identified and reported having situational stressors causing him to feel anxious and depressed impacting his ability to perform his military duties.  His condition was assessed to be acute and not chronic in nature and was considered unsuiting for continued service and was recommended for discharge.  The characterization of his service was deem uncharacterized since he did not complete the entry level status of 180 days of service as detailed in the current AFI 36-3208.  Although his DD Form 214 indicated he served over 180 days (207 days to be exact), he was notified of his discharge on 15 Jun 17, which was within the 180 days of service.  AFI 36-3208, Chapter 1, paragraph 1.19, states separation without service characterization also known as uncharacterized is determined by the date of notification of discharge and not the actual discharge date.  As a result, his requests could not be supported.  The Board may elect to apply liberal consideration to the applicant’s request due to his history of having a mental health condition.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinions to the applicant on 2 Sep 20, for comment (Exhibit F), and the applicant replied on 14 Oct 20.  In his response, he states he successfully completed Basic Military Training and earned a coin.  Even though the recommendation for discharge was made before 180 days, he still belonged to the Air Force and followed the orders until he was officially discharged on 28 Jul 17, which passed 180 days.  Therefore, it is more than 180 days of service.  It is true he had mental pressure when he was in technical training due to a family issue and not because of training.  

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1. The application is timely.  
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 recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, due to the short duration since the applicant’s separation, the Board does not find upgrading the applicant’s uncharacterized discharge based on clemency is appropriate at this time.  Finally, the Board is satisfied that the application of liberal consideration does not warrant relief.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records. 

4.  The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

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-2020-01359 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 17 Feb 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSR, dated 21 Apr 20.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, HQ AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 6 May 20.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, AFBCMR Psychological Advisor, dated 21 Aug 20.
Exhibit F:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 2 Sep 20.
Exhibit G:	Applicant’s response, dated 1 Oct 20.
Exhibit H:	Clarifying Guidance, various dates

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings pertaining to Docket Number BC-2020-01359, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.