AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00156	

SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 21 September 2021 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Serious Offense).  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 and a Summary court-martial judgment.  Her misconduct included:  failure to go, disrespect towards leadership, and communicating a threat.  

The applicant contended she was suffering from a mental condition at the time of the events that led to her discharge.  She claimed she became mentally ill with depression and anxiety and her symptoms worsened over time.  She further claimed her actions were unlike her and she acted out due to heightened anger and emotions.  

A review of the applicant’s record revealed she had multiple incidents of misconduct which included failure to go, dereliction of duty, failure to follow orders, and disrespect towards members of her chain of command.  She also communicated threats against her commander to her medical provider during a medical appointment.  She was placed in pre-trial confinement for communicating the threat and summary court-martial charges were preferred.  She entered a pretrial agreement to plead guilty to all charged offenses provided no forfeitures were adjudged.  She was administratively discharged for misconduct, commission of a serious offense.
 
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 that her mental health status at the time of the events led to her discharge. She also contended she became mentally ill with anxiety and depression and was being treated by mental health providers.  Furthermore, the applicant claimed she was taking a hormone reproductive medication, and her actions were not of her normal self.

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 
There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health care during her time in service.  Based on review of the applicant’s records, the applicant received the diagnoses of Major Depressive Disorder, moderate, with anxious distress, during her time in service. 

3. Does that condition or experience actually excuse or mitigate the discharge? 
The applicant was discharged due to misconduct.  Based on a review of the applicant’s records, the applicant had multiple incidents of misconduct beginning in Basic Military training, and for the duration of her time in service, that escalated in intensity with no nexus to a mental health condition.  The presence of a mental health condition, in and of itself, does not mitigate misconduct, and there is evidence the applicant’s mental health condition was known and considered by her command during her discharge process.  Additionally, based on review of the records, there is evidence the applicant’s most severe misconduct was premeditated with the applicant’s stated intent of getting administratively separated.  Premeditated misconduct is generally excluded from the intent of liberal consideration.  Therefore, there is no evidence the applicant’s mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct 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) and (7)(a)-(7)(r) 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 her 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 1 August 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)