RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00906
		INDEX CODE:  110.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 SEP 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for separation be changed to a medical discharge rather than erroneous enlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was released from active duty for migraine headaches that the Air Force claimed must have happened prior to service.  He states he has never had migraine headaches prior to service.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal statement, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and three reference letters.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 2 May 2006 in the grade of airman basic.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class having assumed that grade with a date of rank of 16 June 2006.  His primary specialty was Security Forces Helper.  On 28 November 2006, applicant was notified by his commander of his intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.14.  The specific reason for this action was erroneous enlistment.  A Chronological Record of Medical Care form, dated 12 September 2006, stated he was diagnosed with migraines.  This condition existed prior to service and had not been aggravated by service.  This condition had prevented him from completing his military training.  Had the Air Force known this condition would have prevented him from performing military duties, he would not have been allowed entry into the military.  He was advised of his rights in this matter and acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  The applicant waived his right to consult counsel and elected not to submit statements on his own behalf.  In a legal review of the case file, the staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient and recommended that he be discharged.  On 5 December 2006, the discharge authority concurred with the recommendations and directed that he be discharged with an honorable discharge, without probation and rehabilitation.  Applicant was discharged on 6 December 2006.  He served 7 months and 5 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial.  DPPRS states based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no facts warranting a change to his narrative reason for separation.

The DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 13 July 2007, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting a change in the applicant’s narrative reason for separation.  After reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that given the circumstances surrounding his separation from the Air Force, the narrative reason for separation assigned appears to be proper and in compliance with the appropriate directives.  The applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise.  Therefore, we agree with the office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-00906 in Executive Session on 28 Aug 07, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
			XXXXXXXXXX, Member
			XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Mar 07, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 31 May 07.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Jul 07.

				XXXXXXXXXX
				Panel Chair