AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00099	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 23 April 2021 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General Discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge narrative reason and a change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

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.  His misconduct included:  Violated COVID-19 directive by wrongfully utilizing an establishment that primarily serves alcohol; assaulted another Airman by pushing him with his hands; drunk and disorderly.

The applicant contended that the discharge was unjust. He explained that he was suffering from mental illnesses that were left untreated due to COVID-19. He asked for the upgrade to allow for more opportunities with jobs and school. 

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 the applicant’s present service characterization renders him 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 “I request change of my DD214 because I feel like the punishment I received was unjust. I was suffering from additional mental illnesses that were never taken care of due to COVID-19 mental health availabilities.” The applicant does not specify what “additional mental illnesses” he had during his time in service. 

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

There is evidence the applicant was Command referred to ADAPT subsequent to two alcohol related incidents during his time in service. The applicant did not endorse or exhibit mental health symptoms during his interactions with ADAPT providers. There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health treatment during his time in service. There is no evidence the applicant exhibited any clinical significant features of any other mental health condition, during his time in service.

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

There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health treatment during his time in service. There is no evidence the applicant exhibited any clinical significant features of any other mental health condition, during his time in service. There is no evidence, nor did the applicant endorse, any underlying mental health conditions that led to the applicant’s maladaptive alcohol use.  There is no evidence a mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct(s) that led to the applicant’s discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated, it 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) 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 mental health issues were not taken care during service because of COVID-19. During the Command referred ADAPT treatment, the applicant did not endorse or exhibit any mental health symptoms. Additionally, there is no evidence that the applicant sought or received mental health treatment.  

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 “Misconduct (Minor Infractions)”, and the reentry code shall remain “2B”. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 23 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)