(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALK	CASE NUMBER

FD-2016-00198	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge characterization. to Honorable, to change the reason and authority for 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 avail.able pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING: After a review of the record, the Board unanimously voted to grant the relief of the requested upgrade as discussed below.

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 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 ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant received an Uncharacterized discharge for Failure to Meet Medical/Physical Procurement Standards. The applicant's discharge was in accordance with AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.14, Basis for Discharge Erroneous Enlistment. AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.13.3, Erroneous Enlistments, defines an erroneous enlistment as one the Air Force should not have accepted but it does not involve fraud. The applicant contends the discharge was inequitable because the diagnosed stress fracture was not present prior to his enlistment. The DRB took note of supporting documentation submitted by the applicant and found that the discharge was both inequitable and improper. The DRB found that at the time of issuance, the discharge was inconsistent with standards of discipline in the Military Service of which the applicant was a member. The DRB determined that the medical condition occurred after the applicant enlisted, and found that the applicant should have been afforded the opportunity to meet a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) instead of being discharged. The Board concluded that the characterization of service,. the reason for discharge, and the reenlistment code were inappropriate.

A discharge is upgraded only if it is established that an inequity or impropriety took place atthe time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record, the Board found enough evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, a change to the reason for the discharge, and the reenlistment code.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was inconsistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and finds the applicant was not provided full administrative due process.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge in accordance with AFI 36-3208 para. 1.19.1.2; the reason for the discharge is more accurately described as Secretarial Authority; and the reenlistment code changed to 3K under the provisions of 10 USC §1553.	

Attachment: Examiner's Brief