AI R FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARIN G RECORD
NAME Of SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLEINITIA L)	GRADE	Af SN/SSAN
(b)(6)	(b)(6)
TYPE HON	I	PERSONAL   APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW
COUNSEL	NAME ot·COUNSEL ANO OR ORGANIZ.\TI ON	ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZ,\TION OF COUNSEL
YES	No
x
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBER SlTTJNG	llON	GEN	UOTllC	OTrlER	DENY

-

(b)(6)	X*

-

X*

X*
....

-

X*

X*
1ssu•:	A94.53	INDL\.  NUJ\llil.K	Al7.00	EX ll lBlTS SlllSiVIJ'ITED 1'0·ru e130ARO
I ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LEITER OF NOTIFICATION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE	 	 	 COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXI11131TS SUl3MITrED A.ITIME OF PERSONAL APPl ARAM ·1-:
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPE1\R/\N(E I!EARING

IHARINC DATE	CASE Nl lUER

19 Feb 20 15	F0-2014-00607
APPl..ICMTS ISSUEANI) I UE BOARDS OtCISIONAL RATIONAl.E ARE DISCUSSf.D ON Tl IE ATrACHED AIR fORCE DISCHARGE Rt:'-1EW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIO'IAL.Jl.

Case heard in Wash ington , D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a persona l appearance with/without counsel, and the right to submil an application to the AFBCMR.
*RE Code

(b)(6)

INJ>ORSt ME)l'T	DATE:  3116/!015
TO:	FROM:
SAf/MRBR	SEC'RETAIH' OFl'IU::Am FOHCE PEH.SONSEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE OISCllARGF. RE\'I E\\' BOARD
550 (STREET WEST, SUITE -10	lJS  COIMAND Dtl. tF. \\ING,.HlO  FLOOR
RANDOLPll AFB, TX 78150--1742	ANORf.llS  ,\Fil,\ID  20762·7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2014-00607	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for a change to 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 pe1tinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDING: The Board denies the change of reason and authority for discharge and change of reenlistment code.

ISSUE: The applicant received an Honorable discharge but was separated  for Non-Retention  on Active Duty

The Air Force Discharge Review Board, under its responsibility to examine the propriety and equity of an Applicant'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 regula1ity in the conduct of governmental affairs unless there is substant ial 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 incl uded an AF418 denying applicant's reenlistment. Applicant was placed on the control roster and recei ved two Letters of Reprimand for failing to report to place of duty.

The applicant submitted no issues regard ing the inequi ty or impropriety of his discharge. The applicant does submit that he is unable to reenlist with his cuiTent reenlistment code of 2X (1st Term Ainnan not selected
for reenlistment).  Applicant was separated under FYI 3 DOS Rollback program, which was one of several vol untary and non-voluntary programs implemented during FY 13 to help bring overall force numbers to congressionall y mandated levels.  The rollback program allowed commanders to consider Airmen for selective reenlistment early.  Airmen who met certain criteria or received a specific identifier for program eligibili ty required unit commanders to make the final decision to deny reenlistment or retain a selected Airman by annotations on the Af 418.  Applicant was denied reenlistment by his commander due to bei ng placed on the control roster on 29 January, 2013.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity to warrant a change to reason for separation or a change to the reenlistment code.

CONCLUSION: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requ irements 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 find ings, the Board fu1ther concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge and determi nes the discharge should remain unchanged.

Attachment: Exami ner's Brief