AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00063	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 8 January 2014 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of the 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 and Counseling.  The misconduct included:  disrespect towards a SNCO, failure to follow orders/regulations, and failure to go.  

The applicant contended he had a service connected mental health condition that was an aggravating factor in his misconduct.  The applicant submitted his VA disability rating letter and has been diagnosed, and rated, for PTSD post discharge.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he had multiple incidents of misconduct over a short period of time that culminated with him being disrespectful towards a Senior Noncommissioned Officer.  He received multiple Letters of Reprimand and Counseling and was punished under Article 15, UCMJ.  He claimed a mental health condition contributed to his misconduct and he has subsequently been rated by the VA for PTSD.  

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 contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  
The applicant contended he had a service connected mental health condition during his time in service that was an aggravating factor to his misconduct. 

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
The applicant submitted his C&P PTSD evaluation and VA rating documents as evidence to support his claim.  The VA evaluator described how the applicant reported (post-service) he has been impacted by his claimed in service traumatic experiences of Military Sexual Trauma (MST) and a training exercise in which he thought he was going to die.  There is evidence the applicant received mental health care in service.  Based upon the evidence submitted by the applicant, the VA evaluator noted the applicant’s in-service treatment focused on occupational and relationship stressors.  There is no evidence the applicant was diagnosed with PTSD during his time in service.  There is evidence the applicant received the diagnoses, in- service, of partner-relational problem, adjustment disorder, and personality disorder. 

The applicant reported he experienced MST to the C&P examiner five years post discharge, but he submitted no testimony or contentions regarding his experience of MST in his application.  Other than this statement, there is no objective evidence in any of the applicant’s in-service or post-service records to support the applicant’s experience of MST.

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
Based on the available records there is no evidence that the residual effects of the applicant’s experience of MST would excuse or mitigate the discharge.  Per review of the available records, the applicant denied having any mental health symptoms and requested to be re-instated to PRP status on multiple occasions.  The applicant provided no testimony regarding the mental health conditions that he contended should excuse the misconduct that led to his discharge. The timeline and impact of these claimed events is unknown on the applicant’s service career, and particularly on his misconduct.  Based on the available records, there is evidence the applicant received mental health treatment during his time in service and was permanently removed from PRP status due to maladaptive behaviors, but there is no evidence the applicant’s mental health condition caused the misconduct that led to his discharge.  The burden of proof is on the applicant to demonstrate a nexus between his mental health conditions and/or experience that he contended mitigated his discharge. 

Regarding the applicant’s concurrence with his VA rating, the VA, operating under a different set of laws than the military, is empowered to offer compensation for any medical or mental health condition with an established nexus to military service, without regard to its impact on a member’s fitness to serve, the narrative reason for release for service, or the length of time that has transpired since the date of discharge. The VA may also conduct periodic reevaluations for the purpose of adjusting the disability rating as the level of impairment from a given condition may improve or worsen over the life of the veteran.  At the snapshot in time of the applicant’s service, there is no evidence the applicant’s mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct which led to the applicant’s discharge.  

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 
Because the applicant’s condition does not mitigate his discharge, it does not outweigh his 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 did not find any evidence of error or impropriety.

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade the 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 UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS - (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 6 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)