GEN		
ITTING	HON		UOTHC	OTHER	DE	
	X+				*	
	X+				*	
					X+*	
	X+				*	
	X+				•	
A67.10		

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE

X

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANlZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER S

		1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD	
		2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW Of DISCHARGE	
		3	LETTER Of NOTIFICATION	
		4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	
			COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD	
			ADDITIONAL EXHIBITSSUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE	
			TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING	
HEARJNG OATE

03 Oct 2013	CASE NUMBER

FD-2013-00611			

Case heard in Washington, D.C.
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board 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 REASON AND AUTHORITY TO SECRETARlAL AUTHORITY
*RE CODE

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

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR fORO: DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR,EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB,MD zt762-700J

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

CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	FD-2013-00611

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable

The applicant was offered a personal  appearance before the Discharge  Review Board (DRB) but decline 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  Board  grants  the  requested  relief  and  change  of  reason  and  authority  for  discharg1 however, change of reenlistment code is denied.

ISSUE:    Applicant received a General discharge for Misconduct -Minor Disciplinary  Infractions

Although not explicitly stated, applicant contends his discharge was inequitable because it was too harsl The records indicated the applicant received one Record of Counseling, one Letter of Admonishment an four Letters of Reprimand over a two month period, but did not receive any non-judicial  punishment. H misconduct included failing to report to duty on time on three occasions, failing to obey a lawful order 1 remain in dormitory while being placed on quarters on two occasions.  After a complete and thorough revie' of the applicant's records, the Board opined the primary reason for discharge was inequitable because it we: too harsh. Although the Board did not condone the applicant's behavior, they concluded there was sufficie1 mitigation and extenuation to substantiate relief. Finally, the Board agreed  to  change  the  applicant' narrative reason and authority for discharge; however, the reenlistment code will remain unchanged.

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

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board concludes that the  overall  quality  of  applicant' service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge and the reason for the discharge is m01 accurately described as Secretarial Authority under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553 the reenlistme1 code changed to 3K under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief