ISSUES	AOl.07	INDEX NUMBER	A06.00	
ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		l		
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME Of PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
HEARING DATE

03 Oct 2013	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00528			

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant 's request.	

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550CSTREET WEST,SUITE40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 781504742

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FQRCE DISCHAJIGE REVIEW BOARD ISJ.5 COMMAND DR. EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AF'B, MD 20762-7001

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OFSERVICE MEl\IBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

AFSNISSAN

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON
x

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DEN

*+

x

*+

x
x
x

*+

*+

*+

AFHQ FORM 0-2077,JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous

CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2013-00528

GENERAL:	The  applicant  appeals  for  upgrade  of  discharge  to  honorable,  to  change  the  reason  and authority for the discharge, and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined and requests that the review be completed based on the available service record.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:  The Board grants the upgrade of the discharge to honorable, however the request to change th<; reason and authority for the discharge and to change the reenlistment code are denied.

ISSUE:   Applicant received a General discharge for an Erroneous Enlistment

Applicant contends the characterization of his discharge was improper.  The records indicated the applicant was notified on 6 September 2012 of his commander's recommendation to discharge him from the Ohio Air National Guard based on an erroneous enlistment.  Due to a recruiter oversight, the applicant was allowed to enlist.  However, it was later found that the applicant had received an RE-3 code from a previous discharge from the Army National Guard, which was for an erroneous enlistment due to a pre-existing medical condition.  The applicant was notified he would be discharged IAW AFI 36-3209, paragraph 3.15.2, erroneous enlistment.  IAW AFI 36-3209, Table 3.1, the only authorized types of discharges allowed in  cases of erroneous enlistments are Honorable, Entry Level, or Release from Custody and Control of the Air Force.  The applicant's commander recommended  the applicant's characterization be Release from Custody and Control of the Air Force.  On 28 December 2012, the discharge authority signed an order characterizing the applicant discharge as General.  After review of the record, the Board found that a General discharge wm not an authorized service characterization IAW AFI 36-3209.  The Board finds the characterization of the applicant's discharge was improper, however the narrative reason and reenlistment are proper based on the applicant's erroneous  enlistment.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge characterization  wai inconsistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, however finds th< applicant was provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is mor< accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief