AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00364	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 13 August 2013 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of his discharge characterization, a change to the discharge narrative reason, and a change to the reenlistment eligibility and separation codes.

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 Counseling and a demotion action.  His misconduct included failure to go on multiple occasions and disciplinary release from a professional military education training course.

The applicant made no contentions.  He requested his discharge be upgraded to improve his employment potential as well as allow him access to educational opportunities.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he had multiple incidents of failure to go to include, reporting late for duty, missed appointments, and he was a no-show for his scheduled promotion test appointment.  He was issued multiple administrative counselings for the infractions.  He was also released from Airman Leadership School for disciplinary issues and displaying a poor attitude.  This misconduct led to his administrative demotion.

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 contend that a condition or experience may have excused or mitigated their misconduct or discharge?  

The applicant checked the boxes for “PTSD” and “other mental health” on the application.”  The applicant contended he requested the upgrade because his discharge status severely damaged his employability.  The applicant made no other contention of a mental health condition.

2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

There is evidence the applicant sought and received mental health services during his time in service related to difficulty sleeping.  A review of the applicant’s records revealed the applicant was seen three times in the mental health clinic related to sleep and reported resolution of symptoms and requested case closure.

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

Based on a review of the applicant’s records, the applicant was discharged due to misconduct (minor infractions).  Several of the applicant’s rebuttals noted personal stress and family stressors contributed to his misconduct.  A review of the applicant’s medical records revealed the applicant reported occupational stressors and difficulties managing family expectations/obligations along with his military duties.  Based on the applicant’s records, the applicant’s misconduct began before his sleep difficulties were reported and the applicant’s misconduct persisted after his sleep difficulties were reported to be resolved.  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? 

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) and (7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity.

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 DRB 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, to change the discharge narrative reason and associated separation code 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.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service, the narrative reason for separation and associated separation code, and the reentry code shall not change.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 10 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)