AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00314	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 1 August 2008 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge characterization and his Narrative Reason for Separation was Misconduct (Minor Infraction). The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization.

The applicant was not represented by counsel and requested the board be completed based on a record 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 Counseling.  His misconduct included being drunk while on duty, failure to report to morning formation, speeding, and rolling through a stop sign at a four-way intersection. 

The applicant requested an upgrade of his discharge characterization. The applicant stated that he was not adequately identified with PTSD before he was discharged.  He stated that his disciplinary actions occurred within a small narrow window, and they were isolated incidents when he was already preparing to be discharged medically from the flight doctor.  He stated that he was isolated by his squadron, which exasperated his condition.  He stated that if his initial separation would have went through quickly, none of the minor infractions would have occurred.  The applicant is requesting liberal consideration based on his symptoms of PTSD interfering with his duty. 

The DRB completed a thorough review of the applicant’s case.  The Board did not find any evidence to indicate that the actions of his leadership were inequitable or improper.  The applicant contented that he had PTSD but he did not provide any further details or explain how the condition influenced his actions.  The applicant did not provide any evidence, nor was there any evidence in the applicant’s service records to indicate that the applicant suffered from PTSD or an event that may have caused the applicant to suffer from PTSD. Because there was no evidence to support the applicant’s contention’s the DRB determined that the administrative actions taken by the chain of command in this case were appropriate.  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 clinical psychologist.  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 checked the boxes for “PTSD” and “other mental health” on the application. The applicant contended “I was not properly identified with PTSD prior to my discharge. I am currently service connected with a 50% rating with a formal PTSD diagnosis through the VA. My disciplinary actions occurred within a small narrow window and they were isolated incidents during a time that I was already being discharge medically from the Flight Doctor. “ 
 
2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

There is no evidence the applicant exhibited nor endorsed any clinically significant indicators of PTSD, or any other mental health condition, during his time in service. There is no evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s contention that he had PTSD, or any other mental health condition during his time in service. 

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

A review of the applicant’s records revealed the applicant was discharged after one year in service due to misconduct (minor infractions); there is no evidence the applicant was being considered for a medical discharge due to air sickness. The applicant stated in his application “If my initial separation went through quickly from the flight doctor none of these minor infractions would have occurred. Furthermore the charges against me were shirking of responsibility and dereliction of duty which are indicators of PTSD.”  

There is no evidence or records to substantiate the applicant’s contention that he had PTSD, or any other mental health condition during his time in service. There is no evidence the applicant exhibited nor endorsed any clinically significant indicators of PTSD, or any other mental health condition, during his time in service. There is no evidence a mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct that led to the applicant’s discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

There is no evidence to substantiate the applicant’s contention that he had a mental health condition in service. Because the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated or excused, 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.” 

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 and medical records, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service, the narrative reason for separation, and the reentry code shall not change.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 28 October 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)