AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARI NG RECORD

NAM E OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST. FIRST MIDOLE INITIAL)

GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

PERSONAL APPEARAN CE

X	RECORD REVIEW

1-  -....-	-t
VES	No
x

NAME OFCOUNSEL AND OR ORGMIZATION

ADORES.SANO OR ORGANIZATION ot·COUNSt:L

VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBER SJTTJ NG

HON	GEN

UOTHC	OTHER

DENY

X*+
X*+ X*+

A67.I O	EXHIBITS SUBUTTED TO THE BOARD
1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 APPLJCA TION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO n1E BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXI-1IBITS SUBMITTED ATTIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

X*+

TAPE R ECORDTNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEA RING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

I J Dec 2013	FD-2013-00639
APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND TllE BOAlD'SDECISIOllAL RATIONALE ARE DISCUSSED ONTHE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHAAGE l\EVJEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant 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 appl icant's request.

*Narrative Reason and Authority
+RE Code

TO:

SAF/MRBR
550C STREET WEST, SUITE 40
RANDOLPH AFB. TX 78150-4742

FROM:

: 12/12/2013

SECRETARY Of THEAIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR tORC£ DISCHARGE REVltW BOA RO 1535 COMIAND OR, EE WING,JRO FLOOR ANUl<EWS AF'B, MO 20762·7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE N UMBF.R

FD-2013-00639	

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

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

Board Note: The applicant stated he voluntarily elected to separate and stated he  has  an  Honorable discharge. However, the applicant's DD Form 214 incorrectly reflects that the applicant received an Honorable discharge. The applicant's AF Form 100, Request and Authorization for Separation, correctly reflects the applicant received a General discharge. The record reflects he was notified on 21 July 2008 of his commander 's intent to discharge him with a· General discharge. He acknowledged  receipt the same day and waived his right to  counsel and to make a statement on his own behalf. On 18 August  2008, the separation authority approved his discharge with a General service characterization. Based on these facts, in addition to considering the narrative reason for discharge and the RE code as requested by the applicant, the Board also considered a change of his characterization of discharge from General to Honorable.

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was based on an isolated incident.  The records indicated the applicant received tw,o Article  15s, one Vacation, and one Letter of Counseling.  His misconduct included failed to answer cell phone and return calls from supervisor and NCOIC, absent from duty (2x), derelict in the performance of duty by failing to contact supervisor, failed to obey a lawful order from a NCO, and failed to go to duty.   The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributions he made in his Air Force career.
The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was doing well and attending college.  However, no inequity or impropriety in his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing.  The Board concluded the misconduct of the applicant appropriately characterized her term of service.

An administrative change will be made to applicant's DD Form 214 to accurately reflect a General service characterization.

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.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief