AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE
(b) (6)
TYPE	I	PERSONAL   APPEARANC E	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME or COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OFCOUNSEL
YES	No
x
:	VOTE OF TiiE BOAl©
MEMBER    SITTING	HON	GEN	UOTHC	OTHER	DENY
(b) (6)	x
x
x
x x
ISSUES	INDEX NUMBER	EITS SUBMTITEi> TO TUE lK)ARo  .	!
A29.00	A29.00
A29.03	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 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL  APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

H.&ARING DATE	CASENUMBER

14 Aug 201S	FD-2014-00398
Al'PUCANT'S ISSUE AND 'IJIEBOARD'S DECISIONAL ltATIONALE AllE DISCUSSEQ.ON,nlE ATI'ACHED Alll FORCE DISCHARGE lllMEW BOARD DEC!SIDNAL ltA110NALE.  ,·.	I
I
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.

- .
(b) (6)

INJX.>RSEMENT	DATE:

812112015'	---   .		J

---····--  --· - ·- ·---	. .		·-·-	.  ,,;... :.....:.... :.......:   .....::.: 	 TO:		FROM:

SAF/MRBR

SECRETARY OFmt AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIJl FORCE DISCHARGE llEVIEW BOARD
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40	151!1 coDR, EE WING, 3JlD FLOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742	ANDREWSAJ1B, MD 20762-7081

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00398	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, a change to the narrative reason 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 Board denies the upgrade of the discharge, change of the narrative reason and change of reenlistment code.

ISSUE: The applicant received an Entry Level Separation for failure to progress in training.

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an applic.ant's discharge, is authorized to change the characterization of service and the reason for discharge if such change is warranted. 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 ensure the discharge met the pertinent standards of equity and propriety. The applicant's record of service included one Letter of Reprimand and three Letters of Counseling. His misconduct included failure to study with his study group as directed (2x), failure to study at least two hours as directed, lying to an NCO, disrespecting an NCO and failure to refrain from talking during a progress check.

The applicant contends that his discharge was erroneously identified as entry level separation due to serving a total of 182 days. He also claims that his re-enlistment code should be changed to reflect involuntary separation versus entry level separation. The records indicate the applicant was notified of discharge on January 13th, 2012, his 167th day of total active military service, therefore discharge under AFI36-3208 paragraph 5.22.2.3, entry level separation was appropriate. The notification date is the date used to determine entry level separation discharges. A discharge is upgraded only if the applicant and the DRB can establish that an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of discharge. After a thorough review of the record, the Board found no evidence to justify an upgrade of the discharge characterization, reason for the discharge or the reenlistment code.

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.

In view 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