AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD BEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b)(6)
TYPE	I	PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD  REVIEW
OOCll!ISl.	NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF TIIE BOARD
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b)(6)	X#
-
X#
,...
X#
-
X#
-
X#
ISSUES	A28.00	INDEX NUMBER	A28.00	EXHIBITS SUBMITrED TO THE BOARD
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OFPERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL' S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING  OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

12 May 2016	FD-2015-00576
APl'IJCAN'rS 15SUBAND 1H11BOAJU)'SDl!ClllONAL lltAn:>NALE AIEJJISCUSSED ON 11tBAlTAQll!D AIR fOltCI! DISOWWI! lUMEW BOAllD Dl!CISIONAL.llA.TJONALI!.

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 AFBC.MR.

#Narrative Reason

.
(b)(6)

TO:	FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECllETARY OF THE .\IR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCll
AIR FORCE DISCllARGE REVIEW BOAR!>
SSO CSTREET WEST,SUITE 40	ISJS COMMAND DR, EE WING, JR!> FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	A:-IDREWSAFB,MDl076i-70Gl

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2015-00576	

GENERAL:	The applicant appeals for characterization of his uncharacterized entry level separation as Honorable and to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

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  finds the evidence insufficient to establish an inequity or impropriety regarding the discharge.

DISCUSSION: The applicant received an Entry Level Separation discharge for Erroneous Enlistment. The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility 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 govenunental 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 ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.

The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was based on the belief that he had prior knowledge of a pre-existing medical condition that caused him to be discharged from the Air Force.  He contends the narrative reason infers he was possibly dishonest during his military entrance process and gives a false impression of his character.

The record indicates the applicant was found to have a condition of "pneumothorax." The Board finds no merit in the applicant's contention regarding the reason for his discharge. The reason for the discharge, erroneous enlistment, was in accordance with AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.14 which stipulates airman are subject to discharge from an erroneous enlistment only if it was not the result of fraudulent conduct on the part of the member.  As such, contrary to the applicant's assertion, his discharge for an erroneous enlistment means he would not have been allowed to enlist had the Air Force been aware of his condition and does not infer the applicant failed to disclose that he had the condition, which would have been considered fraudulent enlistment. The record indicates the applicant's condition was so severe that it prevented continued training. The applicant served less than 180 days and, therefore, his service does not qualify for characterization as honorable. His uncharacterized service is not considered as either good or bad. A discharge is upgraded or changed only if it can be established that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge.

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 full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board found no evidence tojustify characterizing the applicant's service or to change the reason and authority for the discharge.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief