AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2019-00044	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 3 Feb 11 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The board was conducted on 25 Jul 19.  

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), but declined and requested the board be completed based on a records only review.  The applicant was not represented by counsel.    

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553, the board included a member who is a psychiatrist with training on mental health issues connected with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or traumatic brain injury (TBI), and training on mental health disorders.

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. 
  
FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to approve 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.

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 one Article 15 and one vacation of suspended nonjudicial punishment.  His misconduct included:  failure to obey an order, and failure to complete Career Development Course materials.  

Due to evidence of PTSD found in the applicant’s medical record, the board considered the case based on the liberal consideration standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and/or 10 USC §1553.

The applicant contended the discharge was inequitable because he suffered from extreme depression and PTSD.  The applicant states that his brother passed away from a brain tumor, his youngest brother recently had a brain tumor surgically removed, his parents were very ill and returned to their native country to rest, and he was being tested for a brain tumor.  The applicant states that his leadership referred him to attend anger management counseling and speak with mental health.  The applicant admitted that he did not want to be retained in the military because his family concerns affected him and he needed time to heal.  He insists that he is a different man now, and is requesting the upgrade to regain his honor as a Veteran.  

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire record and found evidence of death in the family and mental health involvement.  The board determined family problems coupled with the PTSD demonstrated sufficient impact to serve to mitigate the misconduct.  The DRB concluded that the matters in mitigation of the reason for discharge have affected the applicant’s ability to serve satisfactorily, and relief is warranted.

After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychiatrist, the DRB found conclusive indication that mental health issues had a direct impact on the applicant's misconduct or discharge.

CONCLUSION:  The board found neither the evidence of record, nor that provided by the applicant substantiated an impropriety.  However, sufficient evidence existed to convince the board the discharge was inequitable.  Therefore, the board determined the overall characterization of the applicant’s service was more accurately reflected by an Honorable, and the discharge narrative reason was more accurately described as “Secretarial Authority.”  Additionally, the reenlistment eligibility code was changed to “2C.”   

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 22 Aug 19.  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
1500 West Perimeter Road, Suite 3700
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief