AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2019-00427	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 26 Apr 2017 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a(n) General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The board was conducted on 02 Jun 2020.  

The applicant initially requested for 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 represented by counsel.    

Pursuant to 10 USC §1553, the board included a member who is a psychiatrist/ psychologist 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 3 to 2 to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable and voted 3 to 2 to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C.

 However, the board voted 3 to 2 to approve to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority.

The AFDRB does not have the authority to remove derogatory information from a personnel’s record, such requests will need to be channeled through the Air Force Board of Correction for Military Records (AFBCMR).
 
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 multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling.  His misconduct included:  insubordination, dress & appearance violations, failed room inspection/s, dereliction of duty and various failure to go/tardiness.

Due to evidence of  / post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) / mental health condition/s 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 and counsel contended that the discharge was inequitable/improper.  The applicant’s counsel states the applicant sought mental health help because he was hearing voices and experiencing difficulties at work.  He sought medical help but was instead erroneously discharged for minor infractions and failed by his command to be properly diagnosed.  They note that there was not any substantiated misconduct and that a hasty command-initiated request for the member to be separated.  Although the command had the authority to administratively separate the applicant, the discharge was substantially deficient as they didn’t allow the applicant to “fix” the problem and that in this case they didn’t have the proper authority to separate the applicant.  The counsel states that the General discharge is inequitable, as it does not serve any further purpose and is no longer relevant in the applicant’s life since has lived a responsible life.  The applicant has a history of behavioral health issues that manifested while he was serving and this should have been properly addressed instead of discharging the applicant.  Since his discharge, he has, and continue to, receive treatment and medication for his behavioral issues.

The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports, awards and decorations, and other accomplishments.  The DRB was pleased to see the applicant has been successful since leaving the Air Force.  However, the board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant any changes to the discharge.  The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  It found the seriousness of the applicant’s willful misconduct offset the positive aspects of his service.  

After a thorough review of the service record and input from the board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found 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.

If the applicant can provide additional information to substantiate his contentions, the board recommends he exercise the right to make a personal appearance before the DRB or appeal the DRB’s decision to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.    

CONCLUSION:  

The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge and reenlistment code.  Therefore, the discharge and reenlistment code received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved.  However, sufficient evidence existed to convince the board the narrative reasoning was inequitable.  Therefore, the board determined the discharge narrative reason was more accurately described as “Secretarial Authority.”

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 15 Jun 20.  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
3351 Celmers Lane
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)