AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00335	
					
The applicant was discharged on 20 March 2012 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, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.  The Board was conducted on 19 October 2021.  

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 her 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 multiple Article 15s. Her misconduct included:  with intent to deceive, create a false official record; failed to pay a just debt; willfully failed to verify patient information and eligibility for medical treatment prior to scheduling appointments.

Due to evidence of  post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and 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 10 USC §1553.

The applicant listed a series of events that she attributes to her misconduct. The applicant stated that she was sexually assaulted by three men while she was deployed but she did not report the assault to her chain of command because of negative feedback she received when she discussed the assault. When she returned home, four months later her mother passed away, so she became friends with another female airman.  She stated that this led her down a path of abuse, financial hardship, and caused the eventual demise of her career. The applicant stated that after she could not afford rent and utilities she became desperate and was coerced to tell the leasing office that she was deployed. The applicant stated that she was then convinced to make an appointment for her “friend’s” daughter who she believed had Tricare, even though she knew she wasn’t supposed to make appointments outside of urology. The member then stated she was subsequently physically assaulted by her roommate and sexually assaulted by her roommate’s boyfriend.  She received an Article 15 for scheduling the appointment and she felt that the punishment didn’t fit the crime. The applicant now wants the chance to rejoin any branch of service. The applicant stated that the discharge is inequitable because it was based on isolated incidents that happened after 4-5 years of service and she had no other adverse actions. She stated she was informed not to bring up sexual assaults as this could have her reprimanded but the mental problems and trauma it has caused in the end, cost her 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. The applicant’s testimony is insufficient to determine the impact of her mental health condition on her behavior.  Further evidence and records are needed, to show the timeline of events concerning the assaults and the subsequent impact on the applicant’s mental health and misconduct.  

If the applicant can provide additional information to substantiate her contentions, the Board recommends she exercise the right to make a personal appearance before the DRB or directly appeal the DRB’s decision to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.  
Instructions on how to appeal to AFDRB or AFBCMR can be found at https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

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 26 October 2021.  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)