AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00319	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 2 September 2015 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge characterization and her Narrative Reason for Separation was a Pattern of Misconduct. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her discharge characterization, separation code, and narrative reason for separation.

The applicant was represented by counsel and 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 made the contention that her discharge should be upgraded based on liberal consideration of the sexual trauma she experienced while in the military.  The applicant stated that post-service, she received a diagnosis of PTSD that was caused by sexual harassment and assault that she suffered while serving.   She stated that her post service conduct shows she has been honorably serving her community as a sales supervisor at a telecommunications company and she is working towards a master’s in leadership.  She stated that she also volunteers with the county Literacy Council. The applicant stated that she had two incidents of sexual assault while in service. She stated that she reported both incidents to her supervisor, and he did nothing about it.  She stated that the same staff sergeant distributed her phone number to new airmen to pursue her sexually.  The applicant stated she had a permanent change of station to a new base and the same staff sergeant ended up being her supervisor.  She stated that she sought early separation but was denied in February 2015.  

The DRB conducted a thorough review of the applicant’s service records and determined that despite the sexual assault and harassment she experienced at her first duty location, she was a model Airman.  It wasn’t until she arrived at the new base that her performance deteriorated.  Her significant performance decline corresponds to the applicant’s timeline of her experience of harassment and assault, her reporting the incident to her leadership, and her perception that the leadership did not take her complaints seriously. 

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 “sexual assault/harassment” on the application.  The applicant, through counsel, contended the applicant experienced two sexual assaults during her time in service. 
 
2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health services during her time in service. A review of the applicant’s records revealed the applicant reported symptoms of poor sleep, anxious distress, unstable mood, depressive episodes, and feelings of anger and hopelessness during her time in service. The applicant also endorsed occurrences with she could speak telepathically to people and had experienced hallucinations. Based on a review of the applicant’s medical records, psychological testing indicated the applicant to be feigning psychological distress and grossly exaggerating experiences of distress.

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

The applicant’s contended experience(s) of MST occurred during her first enlistment. A review of the applicant’s records revealed the applicant re-enlisted. The applicant’s mental health records revealed the applicant initially sought mental health services due to a conflict with Air Force values and working in/around RPAs. The applicant’s records reveal the applicant made it known she regretted re-enlisting and no longer wanted to be in the Air Force.  The applicant submitted evidence from her mental health provider during her time in service that indicated the applicant was experiencing marked distress related to feelings of anxiety, unstable mood. A review of the applicant’s medical record also revealed that psychological testing indicated the applicant was feigning or grossly exaggerating psychiatric symptoms, to include psychotic symptoms, resulting in a diagnosis of malingering.  While a diagnosis of Malingering does not mean that the applicant was not experiencing anxiety or depressive symptoms, it does indicate that her presentation was likely deliberately exaggerated to achieve secondary gain- of which the applicant made known: she no longer wanted to be in the Air Force. It is possible that the applicant’s desire to no longer be in the Air Force resulted from her prior enlistment experiences of MST.  There is evidence the applicant’s experience of MST and her mental health condition, were considered during the applicant’s discharge process, and may have mitigated her discharge. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

The Board determined that the applicant’s experience outweighs the 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.” 

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to approve  the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C.
 
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 improper and inequitable. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall change to Honorable, the narrative reason for separation shall change to Secretarial Authority and the reentry code shall change to 2C. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 1 November 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)