AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00383	
					
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 20 December 2012 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  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 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.  His misconduct included:  failure to go, failure to follow regulations, and dereliction of duty.  

The applicant contended his discharge was inequitable due to a Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and other mental health conditions and that he did not receive proper assistance to help his depression.  He claimed he suffered a TBI in a motor vehicle accident.  He further claimed he continued to experience worsening conditions from the TBI that caused him performance issues and episodes of bad judgement and that his misconduct was a direct result of his injuries.  Furthermore, the applicant claimed his condition had not improved since his discharge and he has sought out treatment from the VA.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he had multiple incidents of misconduct that led to issuance of several Letters of Reprimand and Counseling and punishment under Article 15, UCMJ.  He submitted medical records that indicated he was treated for injuries sustained from a motor vehicle accident in May 2010.  As evidenced in the applicant’s record, some of his misconduct pre-dated the accident, and his post-service misconduct was of a similar nature.  

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 checked the boxes for “TBI” and “other mental health” on the application.  The applicant contended his discharge was inequitable because he had a TBI and other mental health conditions and he received no assistance for his depression.  The applicant also contended his conditions were the reason for his misconduct and that no one took the time to understand what was going on with him.

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

Based on a review of the applicant’s records, there is evidence the applicant reported incurring a loss of consciousness secondary to a motor vehicle accident that occurred during his time in service.  There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health treatment during his time in service.  There is also no evidence the applicant exhibited any clinically significant features of a 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 record indicated no remarkable findings related to the loss of consciousness sustained from the motor vehicle accident.  There is no evidence the applicant sought or received any mental health services during his time in service and there is no evidence the applicant reported any mental health symptoms after his car accident, or at any time in service.  Based on a review of the applicant’s records, the applicant’s pattern of misconduct began prior to his car accident and persisted thereafter.

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge?
 
Based on a review of the applicant’s records, the applicant’s misconduct began prior to his reported motor vehicle accident and his records reveal his misconduct persisted after the accident. There is no evidence the applicant had a mental health condition during his time in service and there is no evidence of a nexus between the applicant’s contended TBI and the misconduct for which he was discharged. Thus, the applicant’s discharge is 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 found no evidence of inequity or impropriety. 

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade his 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 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 the reentry code shall not change.  The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 22 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)