AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL DOCUMENT  
	CASE NUMBER

FD-2022-00001	
					
SUMMARY: 

The applicant was discharged on 7 July 2021 in accordance with AFI 36-3208 with an Entry Level Separation for Fraudulent Entry. The applicant appealed for an upgrade of her reenlistment eligibility code.

The applicant was not represented by counsel.    

The applicant requested the board be completed based on a records only review.

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. 

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 that the basis for separation was unfounded. Specifically, she stated that there was no pre-service history or condition for her to disclose to MEPS. The applicant added that when she signed the waiver, it was because she was told to either sign or be discharged. She explained that had she known there was another option, she would have contested the accuracy of the information on the waiver. The applicant also contended that she was only able to see a paralegal during the separation process, not counsel.

The DRB reviewed the applicant’s entire service record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant an upgrade of the discharge. The board acknowledges that the applicant felt there was no pre-service history of mental health conditions, however, it is the burden of the applicant to provide evidence of the contrary, and in this case, the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support this contention.

The applicant’s request for a change of re-entry code to allow for re-enlistment could not be supported due to current policies. Under DoDI 6130.03, Medical Standards for Appointment, Enlistment, or Induction in the Military Services, under Learning, Psychiatric, and Behavioral Condition, the applicant’s reported history of mental health conditions or disorders prior to and during service are considered disqualifying conditions for induction into military service. 

Additionally, the Board considered the factors laid out in the attachment to the Under Secretary of Defense memorandum, Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Regarding Equity, Injustice, or Clemency Determinations, dated 25 June 2018, known as the “Wilkie Memo.”  The Board considered the factors listed in paragraphs (6)(a)-(6)(l) of this memorandum, and concluded the following with regard to each factor: 

(6)(e).  A veteran’s or Service member’s sworn testimony alone, oral or written, may establish the existence of a fact supportive of relief.

In this case, testimony alone was not sufficient to warrant an upgrade to the applicant’s reenlistment eligibility code. The applicant would have to provide medical evidence to prove that she in fact did not have a preexisting condition. The applicant disclosed the information during her evaluation where military providers determined she had a disqualifying condition. Additionally, the applicant signed and concurred that the information was accurate on the mental health evaluation. 

FINDING:  The DRB voted unanimously to deny the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge characterization to Honorable, to change the discharge narrative reason to Secretarial Authority, and to change the reenlistment eligibility code to 2C or 3K.
 
CONCLUSION:  After a thorough review of the available evidence, to include the Applicant’s issues, summary of service, service/medical record entries, and discharge process, the Board found the discharge was proper/improper. Therefore, the awarded characterization of service shall remain “Entry Level Separation”, the narrative reason for separation shall remain “Fraudulent Entry”, and the reentry code shall remain 2C. The AFDRB results were approved by the board president on 29 April 2022.  If desired, the applicant can request a list of the board members and their votes by writing to:  

Air Force Review Boards Agency
Attn: Discharge Review Board
3351 Celmers Lane
Joint Base Andrews, NAF Washington, MD 20762-6602  
Instructions on how to appeal an AFDRB decision can be found at 
https://afrbaportal.azurewebsites.us

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief (Applicant Only)