AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00021	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 24 August 2018 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 applicant requested the board be completed based on a records only review.  The applicant was not represented by counsel.  

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 and Counseling.  His misconduct included:  dereliction of duty, failure to go, and falsifying official documents.  

The applicant made no contentions.  He requested a discharge upgrade stating he has accepted the mistakes he made while serving and has learned from them.  He claimed he has been seeing a psychologist and has been diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder, Level 1 (requiring support), without accompanying intellectual or language impairment.  He further claimed he has been maintaining a supervisory position at a local airport.  He requested an upgrade to allow him access to the GI Bill to seek a degree in business administration.   

A review of the applicant’s record revealed that over the course of approximately 7 months the applicant had multiple incidents of dereliction of duty.  He failed to follow duty procedures, failed evaluations, failed to show for duty and appointments, and falsified inspection forms.  He received multiple Letters of Counseling and Reprimand and was punished under Article 15 UCMJ for the infractions.     

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 contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant requested an upgrade to his character of service stating he accepted the mistakes he made while in the service and has been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder level.
2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health treatment during his time in service. There is evidence the applicant had a childhood diagnosis of ADHD and received the diagnosis in service of Attention Deficit Disorder, combined type (ADHD). 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant did not contend that his mental health condition excused or mitigated his discharge. Based on the available records, there is evidence the applicant was diagnosed and treated pre-service for a diagnosis of Attention Deficit Disorder.  There is no evidence, nor does the applicant contend, this condition was service aggravated, and thus as his condition existed prior to service, it is excluded from liberal consideration. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
The applicant’s discharge is not outweighed by his mental health condition. 

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 did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.

The DRB determined that, through the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior.  The board concluded the negative aspects of the applicant’s service outweighed the positive contributions he made during his Air Force career. Furthermore, the Board understood the applicant’s present service characterization renders him ineligible for Department of Veteran Affairs education benefits.  However, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.  

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge characterization to Honorable.  The DRB also voted unanimously to deny changing the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and changing 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, the narrative reason for separation shall remain, and the reentry code shall remain.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 7 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)