AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00415	
		
SUMMARY:  The applicant was discharged on 14 July 2021 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General discharge for Misconduct (Serious Offense).  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 for larceny of personal property.  

The applicant contended he made a bad decision and has learned his lesson.  He claimed that even though he and his family may have been struggling financially, he had no right to do what he did.  He further claimed he came from a background of survival, which is the reason he joined the military, and he requested his discharge be upgraded to allow him access to educational benefits.

A review of the applicant’s record revealed he used another person’s Samsung Pay account without authorization to obtain money of a value of $330.  Additionally, although not used as a basis for his discharge, the applicant also failed to progress in his Air Force specialty training.  The applicant also checked the “other mental health conditions” block on the DD 293, however, he submitted no evidence with his application to support a mental health contention.  The board determined that the actions taken by the applicant’s chain of command regarding the consequences for his misconduct and the resulting discharge were appropriate.  There was no inequity or impropriety in the circumstances surrounding his discharge. 

LIBERAL CONSIDERATION:

Due to the applicant’s contention of a mental health condition, 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 “other mental health” box on the application.  The applicant did not make any mental health contentions and stated in his application “I made a dumb decision and have definitely learned my lesson.  Even though I and my family may have been struggling, it still gave me no right to do what I did, I just come from a background of survival which is a reason I joined in the first place.  I hope and pray I get my character gets changed so I can go to school and lead by example.”

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

There is evidence the applicant reported difficulty sleeping to a mental health provider (one visit) during his time in service.

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 (serious offense) that included theft of money from another person.  The applicant’s records indicated he reported to the mental health provider on one occasion that he was having difficulty sleeping.  The applicant stated on his application that he “came from a background of survival” as the cause of his misconduct.  There is no evidence of a nexus between the applicant’s in-service mental health condition and the misconduct for which he was discharged.

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

No error or injustice was found in review of the applicant’s records, 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 4 December 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)