AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2020-00760	
					
The applicant was discharged on 2 Aug 18 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 11 Mar 21  

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/ 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 unanimously to deny 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 / 3K.

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 an Article 15, and several Letters of Reprimand.  His misconduct included:  physically controlled vehicle while drunk; arrested/detained for theft/ failed to report for duty for an entire day; failed to show for PT; failed to report on time on several occasions

Due to evidence of mental health conditions 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 states that the current discharge is unjust because it’s based on incorrect information. He states that every single LOR was for Tardiness but the reason for tardiness was medical reasons. The member explains that he was diagnosed with Tachycardia and sleep apnea. Also during that time, he states he was given a diagnosis of depressive disorder and anxiety. The member explains that this is a direct result of his declining health and complete lack of support provided by his unit/leadership and let to 5 days at an impatient mental health clinic. He states that all of these ailments amassed together made it extremely difficult to sleep and maintain a normal life. The member explains the on occasion, he would have serious episodes of SVT which presented themselves as a heartbeat of 180-200 BPM resting heart rate coupled with shortness of breath. He states that these would last all night, leaving him awake until the point of exhaustion. He says that these events are what would cause his tardiness. The member highlights that every LOR he received for tardiness, he would explain in the rebuttal, the reasons for his tardiness was his condition but was constantly ignored. Regarding the arrest incident, the member states that it was proven to be a misunderstanding. He explains that at a bar, he got up to go smoke at a fenced in area outside and picked up what he thought was his phone because it was the same model as his. He continues to say that he was then questioned by an officer who was at the establishment, he attempted to explain the misunderstanding but was immediately arrested for theft. The member states that he explained the situation in the LOR but was again ignored. The member concludes that at trial, the verdict was Nolle Prosequi and his arrest/charges were expunged. 

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.  The board noted that even though the theft incident was dismissed, the other negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.  After a thorough review of the service record and inputs from the board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found no conclusive indication that any mental health issues had a direct impact on the applicant's misconduct or discharge.  In fact, the applicant’s pattern of and most serious misconduct, to include the Article 15, began prior to his diagnosis of a mental health condition.  

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 his request was not approved. 

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 18 Mar 21.  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)