AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00545	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 15 June 2016 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with a General Discharge for Misconduct (Minor Infractions).  The applicant appealed for an upgrade of their discharge characterization.

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 Discharge Review Board (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, a vacation of suspended non-judicial punishment, multiple Letters of Reprimand, and multiple Letters of Counseling.  Their misconduct included:  Failed to send an email, when confronted, lied about the completion of this email; failed to add the bench stock training letters to the drive before the allotted time frame, and upon follow-up, lied about the completion of the task; was instructed multiple times to limit phone use during duty hours, and laughed when this was addressed; failed to maintain dorm standards and failed inspection; a report was filed about the member dumping grease and food garbage off of the balcony on to another Airman’s area, and initially denied the accusations; having knowledge of a lawful order to transfer civilian quarters to military quarters, failed to do so; and failed to obey a lawful order to update the customer support office bulletin board before leaving for the day.

The applicant requested an upgrade to use the GI Bill to go to school.  The applicant explained that, while mistakes were made, the applicant is still growing.  The applicant claims to suffer from substance abuse disorder and schizophrenia and is currently being treated for it.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge.  The Board understood the applicant’s present service characterization renders them ineligible for Department of Veterans Affairs education benefits.  However, this is not a matter of inequity or impropriety which would warrant an upgrade.  

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 have a condition or experience that may excuse or mitigate the discharge? 

The applicant contended “I have non-service-connected Schizophrenia.  I am in treatment for on my records.” 
 
2. Did that condition exist/experience occur during military service? 

A review of the available records revealed the applicant received mental health services during the applicant’s time in service and received the diagnosis, in service of adjustment disorder.  There is evidence the applicant was medically referred to ADAPT during the applicant’s time in service and received the diagnosis of alcohol dependence.

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

The applicant contended “I have been suffering from Substance Abuse Disorder and Schizophrenia which I am in treatment for currently.”  The applicant did not provide any evidence or records to substantiate the claims made.  The Board acknowledges the significant decompensation in the applicant’s mental health and status as documented in the applicant’s post-discharge treatment notes.  However, at “snapshot in time” of the applicant’s service, there is no evidence to suggest the applicant’s mental health condition caused or mitigated the misconduct for which the applicant was discharged.  A review of the applicant’s medical records revealed the applicant reported primary stressors to be anxiety related to social relationship and pleasing peers and superiors.  There was no evidence or records the applicant was exhibiting psychosis during the applicant’s time in service. Based on the available records, it is more likely than not the applicant’s condition developed post-service. 

4. Does that condition or experience outweigh the discharge? 

Because the applicant’s discharge is not mitigated by a mental health condition 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.”  The Board considered the factors listed in paragraphs (6)(a)-(6)(l) and (7)(a)-(7)(r) of this memorandum. 

FINDING:  The Air Force DRB (AFDRB) voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade their 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/medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper and equitable.  Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “General,” the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Misconduct (Minor Infractions),” and the reentry code shall remain “2B.” The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 5 March 2023.  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)