AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE l\fl:l\IBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

X	RECORD REVIEW
A.DDRESS AND OR ORGAl\'IZATION OFCOUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER	DENY

X*+ X*+ X*+
X*+

ISSUF.S	A94.05

INDEX NUMBER

A49.00

1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRJEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADD!TIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE

X*+

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANC E HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

11Dec 2013	FD-2013-00482

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 AFBCMR.

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

*Narrative Reason and Authority
+RE Code

Il·l

---

-

- - ·--  -A ---·--····  --  --

1 .	•	.	..	•.     •	•. : .	•   . •	-'.· ',>·... ..

TO:

SAFIMRBR
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

F1l0M:

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FQRCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISOIAAGE Rf.VIEW BOARD
IS3S COMMAND DR, EE WING,3RD FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB,MD 2076:1-7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00482	

GENERAL:	The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable, to change the reason and authority for the 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 available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING:   The request for the upgrade of the discharge, to change the reason and authority for discharge, and to change the reenlistment code is denied.

ISSUE:   Applicant received a General discharge for Unsatisfactory Participation

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh and he was treated unfairly.  The records indicated the applicant was absent without leave (AWOL) 2-3 October 2010, 4-5 November  2010 and 6-7 November 2010.  The applicant was mailed notifications of his absences via registered mail with signature confirmation.  On 15 Jan 2011, via certified mail, the applicant was mailed notification of his commander's intent to discharge him.  The unit received the receipt card with signature on
23 February 2011.  The applicant did not provide a response.  After a complete and thorough review of the records and the evidence provided by the applicant the Board found no inequity or impropriety in his discharge.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized his term of service.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the discretion of the discharge authority and the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

Inview of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determines the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief