AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2021-00618	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 30 October 2019 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 Board was conducted on 10 February 2022.

The applicant was not 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 an Article 15, multiple Letters of Reprimand, and multiple Letters of Counseling.  His misconduct included:  arrived 15 minutes late to appointed place of duty; willfully failed to complete his assigned tasks; fell asleep on duty; on two occasions-left his appointed place of duty without authority; AWOL from 24 Dec 18 to 27 Dec 18; failed to report to supervisor; failed to go to fitness assessment; failed to report to duty on time after previously being verbally counselled; and failed to meet minimum quality of work inspections. 

The applicant contended that his general anxiety disorder contributed to his discharge, specifically his tardiness, lackluster performance and other infractions that lead to his discharge. The applicant explained that the condition would cause him to worry about something socially happening or messing up on an aircraft part that he was working on. He stated that he would wake in the morning with his mind racing with the things he had to do throughout the day and was worried about something bad happening and that he would be the center of it.  

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his pattern of negative behavior. The Board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career.

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 contends “I had general anxiety condition (GAD) that contributed to the discharge”; there is no evidence the applicant was diagnosed with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), or any other mental health condition, during his time in service. There is evidence the applicant reported having a stressful work schedule and difficulty coping with the requirements of his duties during his time in service.  

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

There is evidence the applicant reported experiencing stress to his medical provider in 2019 related to his working conditions. There is evidence the applicant was referred to the mental health clinic during his administrative separation processing after the applicant reported concerns that he may have a “learning disability”. The mental health provider noted to the applicant’s it was unlikely the applicant had an anxiety syndrome, identifying his symptoms to be situational and performance related.   

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

Aside from the applicant reporting that his task anxiety and learning difficulties had been present since childhood, making them EPTS conditions, neither of these conditions mitigate or excuse the applicant’s discharge.  The applicant was discharged due to misconduct; there is evidence the applicant exhibited a pattern of disciplinary infractions, despite accommodations to improve his performance including; being moved to different sections and being placed back into a training status to accommodate a slower pace of learning.  The applicant still did not adhere to Air Force standards. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge?
Because the condition does not mitigate the discharge, it also does not outweigh the discharge. No impropriety or injustice was found in the discharge processing.  

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 these applicable factors: 

(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 board determined that the discharge was proper and equitable. Most if of the applicant’s mental health conditions were determined to have existed prior to service and were not mitigating to his pattern of misconduct. 

Medical Board Member Opinion

1.  Does the available record support PTSD (or other mental health condition) existed at the time of applicant’s military service?  Yes

2.  Were these conditions present at time of misconduct?  Yes

3.  Were these conditions mitigating for the misconduct?  No, the conditions existed prior to service. Additionally, these conditions were not mitigating to the member’s pattern of misconduct.

4.  Did the applicant receive mental health and/or medical evaluations prior to their administrative separation?  Yes, there is evidence that the applicant was referred to the mental health clinic during his administrative separation processing. 

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 characterization of service shall remain “General”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Misconduct (Minor Infractions)”, 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)