AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00655	
	
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 30 March 2009 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference using Zoom on 19 April 2022.  No witnesses were 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 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, vacation of suspended nonjudicial punishment, and multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling.  His misconduct included:  larceny of personal property, failure to go, driving on a suspended license, false official statement, reckless driving, failure to obey orders and regulations, and failure to go.  

The applicant contended the command made an error in discretion by not taking his mental health condition into consideration as a mitigating factor to his misconduct.  The applicant further contended his misconduct was minor in nature and it was an injustice to have discharged him for it.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he had multiple incidents of misconduct that resulted in several Letters of Reprimand and Counseling, an Article 15, and a Vacation Action.  He also was considered an ADAPT program failure for non-compliance with program requirements.  The applicant was subsequently discharged for ADAPT program failure and Misconduct, with Misconduct as the primary basis.
 
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 physician, clinical psychologist, or 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: 

Did the veteran contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant, through counsel, contended the “command made an error in discretion” by failing to consider the applicant’s mental health condition in his discharge characterization. 

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
The applicant claimed he drank heavily during his time in service and was diagnosed with depression, anxiety, and alcoholism during his time in inpatient alcohol rehab.  There is evidence the applicant was command referred to ADAPT on two occasions for alcohol related incidents and received both inpatient and outpatient treatment for substance use and received the diagnosis of alcohol dependence.  There is evidence the applicant was referred for psychiatric testing during the aftercare phase of substance use treatment which revealed the applicant exhibited features of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADHD), combined type. 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant was discharged due to misconduct; per the available records there were at least seven documented incidents of misconduct during the applicant’s time in service.  Based on review of the available records, there is evidence the applicant’s ADHD existed prior to service (EPTS); there is no evidence of service aggravation, and thus is excluded from liberal consideration.  Based on the available evidence and the applicant’s testimony, there is evidence the applicant’s alcohol use may have caused or contributed to the misconduct that led to his discharge but it does not excuse or mitigate the applicant’s discharge.  There is no evidence the applicant’s alcohol use was due to an underlying unfitting mental health condition.  The applicant also noted, in his personal appearance testimony that he continued to commit misconduct when he was not using alcohol.  

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because the applicant’s condition does not mitigate or excuse his discharge, the applicant’s discharge is also 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) and paragraphs
(7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum and did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.

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.  Therefore, the board found the applicant’s contention without merit and concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.    

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The DRB also voted unanimously to deny changing the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and changing 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 22 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)