AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2020-00280	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 21 April 2014 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the  Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB), with counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 07 February 2023.  One Witnessed was present to testify on the applicant’s behalf. 

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. 

DISCUSSION:  The AFDRB, 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 an Article 15, a vacation of suspended non-judicial punishment, and a Letter of Reprimand.  Her misconduct included violating a no contact order and engaging in an adulterous relationship.

The applicant requested a change to her characterization of service to “Honorable.”  She also asked to change the narrative reason for separation to “Secretarial Authority” or “Miscellaneous/General Reasons.”   The applicant contended that her discharge was inequitable.  She stated she had post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to Military Sexual Trauma (MST) and that the MST contributed to her misconduct, which resulted in her discharge.  The applicant got involved with an Airman, who was one  of the few who helped her feel safe.  The council noted that a mental health provider confirmed that because of what the applicant was suffering, it was difficult to extract herself from her relationship with the Airman.  The applicant stated the ex-wife of the Airman, the applicant was involved with called the Airman’s leadership to report the affair with the applicant, despite also being involved with another Airman that she later admitted to.  The Major put a no-contact order in place, and the applicant stated that she abided by it.  The applicant indicated that once the ex-wife admitted to committing adultery and the divorce was finalized, the applicant and Airman resumed seeing each other.

The Board conducted a thorough review of the applicant’s records and determined the applicant violated a direct order given by her commander twice.  After consideration of the evidence in this case, the DRB determined the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated and it is also not outweighed.  Although the applicant provided testimony that she experienced sexual assault, there is no evidence in the applicant’s service or medical records to substantiate an assault occurred.  Also, there is evidence the applicant’s command considered the applicant’s mental health at the time of discharge.  

LIBERAL CONSIDERATION:
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 (LC) standards required by guidance from the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and 10 USC §1553.  The Board included a member who is a clinical psychologist.  Specifically, the Board reviewed the four (4) questions the Under Secretary of Defense provided that boards should consider when weighing evidence in requests for modification of discharges due in whole or in part to mental health conditions, including PTSD; Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI); sexual assault, and sexual harassment.  The Board considered the following: 

1. Did the veteran have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

The applicant checked the boxes for “PTSD,” “Other Mental Health,” and “Sexual Assault/Harassment” on the application.  The applicant, through counsel, contended the “Applicant’s current discharge is inequitable because her PTSD due to MST contributed to the misconduct for which she was discharged.” 

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

The applicant, through counsel, contended the applicant experienced military sexual trauma and PTSD during her time in service.  There is no evidence the applicant received any mental health services during her time in service.  There is no evidence the applicant received a diagnosis of PTSD during her time in service.  There is no evidence or records the applicant exhibited any clinically significant indictors of PTSD, or any mental health condition, during her time in service.  In the notice of administrative discharge, the applicant’s Commander stated, “There is no indication that [the applicant’s] misconduct is a result of post-traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury.” 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

A review of the applicant’s records revealed the applicant was discharged due to misconduct, minor infractions.  

In a review of the applicant’s previous request to the Board the applicant stated “I by no means condone the choices I made leading up to my discharge.  I have grown to see how silly and irresponsibly they were.  I should have never aloud [sp] my feelings and emotions to effect [sp] my work or military service.  I was blinded by what I thought was love.”  

The applicant, through counsel, contended “Fellow airmen, including her superiors, sexually assaulted and sexually harassed her on an almost constant basis throughout her service, while on and off duty.”  The applicant, through counsel, contended the applicant experienced sexual assault while stationed at Shaw AFB and at a house party she was forced against a wall and kissed by another airman in front of others.  The applicant, through counsel, contended she reported sexual assault to her superiors, but no action was taken. The applicant reported during her personal appearance that she did not report the assault but clarified that she talked to a friend of higher rank about the incident and decided not to report the incident after the conversation.  

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated, it is also not outweighed.  There is evidence the applicant’s command considered the applicant’s mental health at the time of discharge.  In the notice of administrative discharge, the applicant’s Commander stated, “There is no indication that [the applicant’s] misconduct is a result of post-traumatic stress disorder or traumatic brain injury.” 

Additionally, the Board considered the factors laid out in the attachment to the Under Secretary of Defense memorandum, Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations, dated 25 June 2018, known as the “Wilkie Memo.”  

FINDING:  The AFDRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge characterization to “Honorable,” to change the discharge narrative reason to “Secretarial Authority,” and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to “2C” or “3K.”

CONCLUSION:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the applicant’s issues, summary of service, service/medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “General,” the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Misconduct (Minor Infractions),” and the reentry code shall remain “2B.”  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 10 March 2023.  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  

Instructions on how to appeal an AFDRB decision can be found at 
https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)