AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00076	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 19 March 2019 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 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 and multiple Letters of Reprimand.  His misconduct included:  stealing an iPhone valued at $728.85; utilizing his GTC seven times for unauthorized purchases totaling $514.92, paying rent in the amount of $1055.95, and using the GTC twice more to purchase groceries and fuel totaling $174.83. The total unauthorized GTC transactions charges equaled $1745.70.  The applicant also had a past due amount on his STAR card of $137.13 and $114 past due on the retail plan. The applicant also failed to ensure both credit lines were closed prior to cancelling the card; and he failed to report to duty.  He was scheduled for administrative action, but stated that he would be at civilian court that day. The first Sergeant attended the court-date but the applicant did not appear. The attorney stated that he had waived his requirement to appear; and the applicant made a false official statement when asked about the court appearance, in that, he stated he was at the court appearance.  The applicant was involved in a verbal altercation and was observed yelling at other people and disrupting the crowd, which resulted in people gathering and pushing each other around. Police instructed the applicant to leave and the applicant communicated threats back at them resulting in his arrest for the threats and disorderly conduct. The applicant then failed to report the arrest.  He was involved in domestic violence with the mother of his son. The report stated he pushed, screamed and shoved her to the floor. He then left with his son. Police called but he refused to give them his exact location. He then attempted to leave by going to the Airport but the first sergeant was notified of a warrant for his arrest and called the applicant. He was told to turn himself in so he did and was arrested for battery.  The applicant was also arrested for Petit theft because he was caught changing price tags on a mattress. The applicant was given a pretrial diversion program for first time offenders. The applicant failed to report the arrest and pretrial diversion program.

The applicant felt that he discharge was handled with an unfair bias. He contended that there was a lack of history of discipline. He explained that the infractions were due to a mental break and he lacked the mental strength to obtain help through counseling at the time. The applicant concluded that he has grown to understand how to cope and how important it is to keep mental health in order. 

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 record shows that through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. There was in fact a long history of discipline. Due to this pattern of misconduct, 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 only request a character upgrade due to my lack of a history of discipline. My infractions came from a break in mental health which has been diagnosed by the VA.”  

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

There is evidence the applicant sought and received 2 sessions of mental health counseling during his time in service. There is evidence the applicant received Family Advocacy Program (FAP) services for nearly a year during his time in service due to multiple allegations of the applicant being the perpetrator of physical maltreatment. There is no evidence the applicant exhibited any clinical significant features of a mental health condition during his time in service.

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

The applicant was discharged due to a pattern of misconduct. Based on review of the applicant’s record, there is evidence the applicant’s misconduct resulted in both military disciplinary actions and civilian disciplinary actions.  The applicant’s misconduct spanned a period of more than four years and included (but were not limited to) stealing, multiple unauthorized uses of his GTC, making a false official statement, disorderly conduct, and petit theft. Based on the applicant’s records, the applicant exhibited a marked history of misconduct for the duration of his time in service. There is no evidence the applicant’s misconduct were caused or mitigated by a mental health condition and there is no evidence the applicant had any mental health conditions in service.

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated or excused, his discharge is also not outweighed. 

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/improper. 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 4D. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 13 June 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)