AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2019-00734	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 9 Aug 18 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization to Honorable, and a change to the discharge narrative reason.  The board was conducted on 27 Feb 20.  

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 deny the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge characterization to Honorable, and to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority.

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, one Letter of Reprimand, one Letter of Admonishment, and one Record of Individual Counseling.  Her misconduct included:  with intent to deceive, made a false official statement; on diverse occasions broke a no contact order; physical assault of an Airman; wrongfully engaged in sexual relations with someone not her spouse; with intent to impede an investigation; made a false official statement; accessed for official use only document for other than official business; failure to obey a direct order; and failure to adhere to dress and appearance standards. 

Due to evidence of a mental health condition 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 she was misdiagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD).  The applicant insists she was diagnosed after sessions with a Mental Health Physician.  She believes that she did not receive the much needed support from her leadership.  She state that she was anxious about her pending divorce and raising her daughter alone.  The applicant submitted the findings from the Department of Veterans Affairs that diagnosed her with Adjustment Disorder rather than BPD.  The applicant insists that leadership promised that she would receive an honorable 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 her negative behavior.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions she made during her Air Force career.    

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

CONCLUSION:  The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge.  Therefore, the discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and her request was not approved. 

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 23 Apr 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)