AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2021-00366	
					
The applicant was discharged on 10 July 2006 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct.  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The Board was conducted on 4 November 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 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 several Letters of Reprimand and multiple Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included: failure to go at the time prescribed; failure to maintain quarters in inspection order, twice time in one month; failure to open visitor center at designated time; failure to go at the time prescribed on several occasions; and negligently failed to provide necessary medical care for juvenile child. 

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 contested his discharge characterization, discharge narrative reason, and reenlistment eligibility code. The applicant’s leadership recommended the discharge because of the pattern of misconduct in the applicant service record during the single period of enlistment.  The applicant and counsel contended that the discharge was inequitable and improper due to the undiagnosed bipolar disorder during service, and the role the condition played in the member’s misconduct. They stated that the severe mental illness excused or mitigated the misconduct. 

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 concluded the 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 input from the Board’s psychiatrist/ psychologist, the DRB found that some aspects of the applicant’s mental health condition were mitigating factors to some of the applicant's misconduct, however, it could not completely explain or excuse the misconduct sufficiently to warrant upgrading the discharge. While the applicant’s mental health condition likely caused or significantly contributed to the misconduct that lead to the applicant’s discharge, it does not excuse his discharge. Although, the applicant’s VA post-discharge treatment notes indicate significant decompensation in the applicant’s mental health, there is no evidence of this, based on the available records during the “snapshot in time” of the applicant’s service. The Board psychology advisor found no error with the evaluation or diagnoses of the applicant’s military treating providers.

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 6 November 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)