AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

 FD-2017-00548	
					
GENERAL:  The applicant was discharged on 9 Aug 16 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an uncharacterized Entry Level Separation for Fraudulent Entry Into Military Service.  The applicant appealed for a change to the discharge narrative reason. 

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Joint Base Andrews, MD, on 19 Jun 18.  A witness was present and testified on the applicant’s behalf.  

The attached examiner’s brief (provided to applicant only), extracted from available service records, contains pertinent data regarding the circumstances and character of the applicant’s military service. 
  
FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to change the discharge narrative reason.  It also voted not to change to the reenlistment eligibility code.

DISCUSSION:  The DRB, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applicant’s discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the narrative reason for discharge if such changes are warranted.  If applicable, the board can also change the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code.  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 determine if the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety.  

The applicant contended his discharge was inequitable due to a policy change that was implemented approximately 5 months after his discharge.  The policy change allowed members with his medical condition to be considered for a waiver to medical accession standards.

During his testimony, the applicant admitted he did not fully disclose all the details of his medical history during his enlistment process.  Had he done so, he knew he would not have been eligible to enlist.  Therefore, the DRB determined the applicant’s current discharge narrative reason is accurate.  While the board appreciated his strong desire to rejoin the Air Force by pursuing a commission, it did not find any evidence of inequity or impropriety. 

CONCLUSION:  The board found insufficient evidence of an inequity or impropriety that would warrant a change to the applicant’s discharge narrative reason.  Therefore, the narrative reason for separation received by the applicant was deemed to be appropriate and his request was not approved. 

The DRB results were approved by the board president on 5 Jul 18.  If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to:  SAF/MRBR (CITU), 550-C Street West, Suite 41, Randolph AFB, TX  78150-4743.
  
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief