AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00582	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 13 June 2014 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General Discharge for Pattern of Misconduct. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization.  The Board was conducted on 10 February 2022.

The applicant was represented by counsel.    

The applicant requested the board be completed based on a records only review.

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 multiple Letters of Reprimand, and multiple Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included:  physically controlling a vehicle while drunk with a BAC of 0.12., DUI and speeding; posting a racial picture on social media after having read and signed the Air Force Social Media guide; failure to obey an order after receiving annual feedback and expectations; and addressing another member disrespectfully in violation of AFI 36-2618 para 3.1.2.3.2, which states zero tolerance for discrimination. 

The applicant and counsel contended that his positive post-discharge conduct, combined with his history of mental health conditions weigh heavily in favor of upgrading the discharge. The applicant, through his counselor, stated that he has paid for the indiscretions that led to his discharge and has been fully rehabilitated. 

The applicant and counsel explained that during the member’s first deployment, he started to experience mental health issues. Upon return, his anxiety increased as the workload became lighter and he had a constant change of supervisors. The applicant stated that the drastic change in lifestyle coupled with inconsistent leadership exacerbated his mental health issues. They explained that the issues became all but consuming and resulted in issues at work like struggling to complete tasks, minor lapses in judgment, and sheer misunderstanding. The applicant stated that the member did not seek help for fear of reprisal from command. As his mental health continued to deteriorate, they stated that he start to abuse alcohol, as an escape from reality. Lastly, they explained that he then received news that his mother attempted suicide so he went to a bar to drink and distract himself. This concluded with the applicant being arrested for DUI and subsequently discharged.  

The DRB acknowledges the applicant success since leaving the Air Force.  However, the Board reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant any changes to the discharge. Additionally, the board found no evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s claim that he had a mental health condition in service. The discharge received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate.   

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: 

1. Did the veteran have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

The applicant, through counsel, contended “to cope with these mental health issues, Mr. Wilson turned to alcohol”. Counsel referenced the applicant having anxiety as a pre-service condition, and noted “symptoms” became pronounce when he was “stripped of the structure and daily routine at Al Udeid”. Despite the contentions, there is no evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s claim that he had a mental health condition in service.   

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

There is no evidence or records the applicant was ever seen in the MH clinic during his time in service for any mental health conditions. There is no evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s contention that he was self-medicating a mental health condition. During the applicant’s time in service he completed four post-deployment health assessments and three preventive health assessment, and denied any/all mental health symptoms on every assessment. There is no evidence in applicant’s service record or medical record that he endorsed any clinically significant symptoms of a mental health condition during his time in service.  The applicant, through counsel submitted documentation that the applicant received mental health treatment and a mental health diagnosis post discharge; based on the available records it is more likely than not the applicant’s condition developed post-service.   

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

There is no evidence or records the applicant had a mental health condition in service, thus it does not excuse or mitigate the discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because there is no evidence the applicant had any mental health conditions during his time in service his condition or experience does not outweigh the discharge.  

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 concluded the following with regard to each factor: 

(6)(h).  Requests for relief based in whole or in part on a mental health condition, should be considered for relief on equitable, injustice, or clemency grounds whenever there is insufficient evidence to warrant relief for an error or impropriety.
The applicant contended that there was a history of mental health conditions that contributed to his misconduct, however, there was no evidence or records of a mental health condition, or that he was seen by a Mental Health professional during service. Nor is there any evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s contention that he was self-medicating a mental health condition. During the applicant’s time in service he completed four post-deployment health assessments and three preventive health assessments, and denied any/all mental health symptoms on every assessment. There is no evidence in applicant’s service record or medical record that he endorsed any clinically significant symptoms of a mental health condition during his time in 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 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 awarded characterization of service shall remain “General”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Pattern of Misconduct”, and the reentry code shall remain 2B. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 14 February 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)