AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00622	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 27 December 2017 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), via video teleconference using Zoom on 29 March 2022.  No witnesses were present to testify on the applicant’s behalf.  The applicant was not represented by counsel. 

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 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, a vacation of suspended nonjudicial punishment, and multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling.  Her misconduct included:  failure to obtain proper leave approval, failure to go, driving when base privileges were suspended, destruction of military property, physical altercations with her spouse, and posting comments on social medial that were prejudicial to good order and discipline.  

The applicant contended her discharge was inequitable due to an undiagnosed and mistreated mental health condition that ultimately led to her behavior and decision making.  She claimed she had undiagnosed ADHD and PTSD which she incurred while on active duty.  She also claimed she was harassed and alienated by her unit which led to her separation.  She asserted that had her unit given her the help she needed, she would still be enjoying a prosperous career.  

The applicant further claimed to have been in an abusive relationship with her spouse and that she was the victim.  She also stated her organization knew about her relationship problems and did not support her during this time and instead punished her.

Finally, the applicant claimed she was the victim of a sexual assault by a fellow Airman from her unit.  She stated she did not report the assault as she feared coming forward would further alienate her from her unit.  She claimed that after the assault her mental health deteriorated and, while she sought treatment while in the service, she did not report the assault until after she had been discharged.  She requested liberal consideration claiming her misconduct was the direct result of her PTSD symptoms.  

A review of the applicant’s record revealed she had multiple incidents of misconduct over the course of approximately 16 months.  Her misconduct varied from failure to follow orders and regulations, posting inappropriate comments on social media, driving on base while her privileges were suspended (multiple times), having a physical altercations with her spouse, and failure to go.  She declined to submit a response to the administrative discharge action.  

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/psychiatrist.  Specifically, the Board reviewed the four 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 post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI); sexual assault, and sexual harassment.  The Board considered the following: 

1. Did the veteran contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant contended she had undiagnosed ADHD and PTSD which she incurred while on active duty.  She further contended she faced harassment and alienation from her unit, which led to her eventual separation.  She believed that had her mental health been taken seriously and managed properly, she would still be enjoying a prosperous military career.  The applicant also claimed she experienced military sexual assault during her time in service. 

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
There is no evidence or records to substantiate that the applicant was diagnosed with ADHD or PTSD in service.  Based on the available records, there is evidence the applicant was diagnosed with “Anxiety Disorder, unspecified” in service and “Problem related to employment.”  Per available records, the applicant intermittently sought and received both on base and off base mental health services during her time in service.  There is also evidence, based upon the available records, the applicant reported to healthcare providers that she had anxiety prior to service and had been in family counseling.  The applicant reported in her personal appearance testimony that she was sexually assaulted by a military member that worked in her unit in/around June 2017.  The applicant did not submit any records or supporting documentation to substantiate her claims of sexual assault and the provided testimony at her personal appearance conflicted with her written application contentions. 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant was discharged due to misconduct, with nine documented incidents of misconduct during her two years, six months in service.  Based on the available evidence and records, there is no mitigating nexus between a mental health condition and the misconduct(s) that led to the applicant’s discharge.  Based on the available records, there is no evidence a mental health condition caused the misconduct(s) that led to the applicant’s discharge.  Six of the nine documented misconduct(s) that led to the applicant’s discharge occurred before the applicant’s stated approximate date of the sexual assault.  It is possible the applicant experienced military sexual assault, although the timeline provided by the applicant of the occurrence of the military sexual assault would not mitigate or excuse the six unrelated incidents of misconduct that occurred prior to the claimed sexual assault. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because the condition does not excuse the discharge, the applicant’s discharge is not outweighed.

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.”  The Board considered the factors listed in paragraphs (6)(a)-(6)(l) of this memorandum and did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.

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 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.  Therefore, the characterization of service shall remain, the narrative reason for separation shall remain and the reentry code shall remain.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 1 April 2022.  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)