AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD BEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST,FIRST MIDDLE lNITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
'COUl!nl.	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
Y£S	No
x
VOTE OF'rlttARD
MEMBER  SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	x
-
x
-	x
x
x
ISSUES	A94.00	INDEX NUMBE R	A06.00	EXHIBITS  Sl1BMTIED T()THE BOARD
1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED ATTIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARJNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

12 May 2016	FD-2015-00548
APPLICANT'SJSSU&AND'lll6IIOAJtD' SD.ECISIONAl-k.\UONAU:AliliDJSCUSSllDONtHl!A 1TAOIEllAIRFOilCEDISOWlGERIMEW1IOARDDECISIONALAAT10MALB.

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.

'(b)(6)	-

.........     ....

"-	JNDORSEMENT	D 1!:..,_	0lJ
TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE R£V1EW BOARD
SSO C STREETWEST, SUITE 40	ISJS COMMAND DA. EE WING, 3Rl> FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWS .Ull.JllD :i.762·700I

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

CASE NlJMDER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD DECISIONAL  RATIONALE	FD-2015-00548

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization to Honorable or General.

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 denies the request to upgrade the discharge characterization.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of d ischarge.

ISSUE:  The applicant received an Entry Level Separation for Failure to Meet Medical/Phy sical Procurement Standards.

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibi lity to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. In reviewing discharges, the Board presumes regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs unlessthere 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 processto ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant received an entry level, uncharacterized, separation for his failure to meet medical/physical procurement standards. During Basic Military Training, he failed to meet minimum fitness standards on two assessments. Thereafter, he was medically evaluated and recommended for separation based on a diagnosis of flat feet.

The applicant contends that he is experiencing employment discrimination because his discharge is uncharacterized.   He claims that he lost ajob offer with the National Security Agency two years ago because he did not receive an Honorable discharge. He also claims that he has been questioned in his present job about why his discharge was not Honorable.  The DRB carefully considered the applicant's contentions and thoroughly reviewed his records.  Jt determined that the narrative reason for his discharge is accurate and
that his Entry Level Separation is appropriate and warranted under the circumstances.

A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the Board can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.  After a thorough review of the record, the Board  found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the discharge authority, and that the applicant was provided fuJI administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determ ines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief