AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00049	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 7 September 2011 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 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 multiple Letters of Reprimand, a Letter of Counseling and an Admin Demotion. Her misconduct included: intentionally and knowingly made a disloyal statement to the NCOIC about attending a mandatory appointment; failure to go at the time prescribed on two occasions; arrested for DUI with a BAC of .12%; failure to report to PT or work at the directed time; and failure to fulfill junior enlisted responsibilities.  

The applicant stated that she experienced MST during service. She explained that she also had chronic medical issues due to migraine headaches, which caused her to have physiological issues and subsequently caused her to self-medicate using prescribed medicine as well as alcohol. She stated that due to everything she went through, she began to drink heavily, began falling asleep at work, and showing up late. In conclusion, the applicant explained that she reached out to command but they did not understand the severity of her situation. She asked for the upgrade in order to finish her education.  

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  The Board acknowledges that the applicant’s present service characterization renders her ineligible for Department of Veterans Affairs education benefits.  However, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.  

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 contended, “during my tour of active duty, I had (MST) Military Sexual Trauma, due to this I had a child, and had reached out to my command with no avail.” The applicant also contended, “I also had chronic medical issues due to migraine headaches, which cause me to have physiological issue which ultimately cause me to self-medicate, using prescribed medicine as well as alcohol.” 

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

There is no objective evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s claim of MST. The applicant provided only one sentence of testimony regarding her experience of MST and the evidence in the applicant’s medical and administrative records conflicts with this testimony. It is possible the applicant experienced MST, but additional evidence and testimony is needed. There is no evidence or records that indicate the applicant was diagnosed with or exhibited any clinically significant indicators of PTSD during her time in service. 

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

Based on the available records, the applicant was referred to an off-base facility for a higher level of mental health treatment and reported to mental health personnel she was benefitting from this treatment, although the facility staff reported that applicant was frequently absent and not engaged in treatment.  There is evidence the applicant was receiving medication management during her time in service for her mood and sleep. The applicant did not submit any additional substantiated information or records that were not considered at the applicant’s time of discharge. Based on the available records, there is evidence the applicant’s mental health conditions were acknowledged and considered prior to and during her discharge process and subsequent categorization. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because the applicant’s condition did not excuse her discharge, it does not outweigh her 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 an incident of MST (Military Sexual Trauma) was the cause for the misconduct. However, there is no objective evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s claim. The applicant provided only one sentence of testimony regarding her experience of MST and the evidence in the applicant’s medical and administrative records conflicts with this testimony. It is possible the applicant experienced MST, but additional evidence and testimony would be required for the board to understand how the experience mitigated the misconduct.
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 awarded 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 17 May 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)