AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN	UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

X*+

X+	*
X+	•
X+	*
X*+

A49.00

1 ORDER APPOINTING TIIE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETIER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE .
TAPERECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

llEAIUNG DATE	CASE NUMBER

11Sep 2013	FD-2013-00362

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appHcant 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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

+cHANGE RE CODE
*NARRATIVE REASON AND AUTHORITY

TO:

SAFIMRBR
SSO C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX781504742

FROM:

SECR£TARY OFTHE AIR FORCE Pt:RSOHNEL COVNCIL
AIR FORCE DISOIARGE REVIEW BOARD lSJ5 COMMAND DR, EEWING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AJIB, MD 20762-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00362	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals to change the reason and authority for the discharge and to change the reenlistment code.

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), with counsel, via video teleconference between Andrews AFB, Maryland, and Randolph AFB, Texas, on 11 September 2013.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #5: Employer Letter

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:	The Board denies the request to change of reason and authority for discharge; however, the Board grants the request to change the reenlistment code.

ISSUE:  Applicant received an Honorable discharge for Unsatisfactory Performance

The applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and believes he should have been given the opportunity to be reclassified into another career field.  The records indicated the applicant failed one AQR test and four target course tests while attending technical training for AFSC 1N411B. On
19 June 2012, the applicant met an academic review board. The academic review board recommended elimination from the course. The applicant's commander recommended he be discharged and not reclassified into another career field. After a review of the records and the applicant's testimony, the majority of the Board found that although the reason and authority for the discharge was equitable, the reenlistment code should be changed.

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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the reenlistment code be changed to 3K under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief