AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING  RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (l,AST, FIRST MflmLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

TYPE

AMN

PERSONAL  APPEARANCE	X   RECORD REVIEW

. (;OUN$EL	NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
YES	NO
x

ADDRESS AN]) OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSICL

MEMBERS SITTING	OTHER

x

x

DENY

x

ISSUES
A94.04

INDEX NUMBF.R
A49.00	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTI FICATION
2	
!IF.ARING PATE
18 JUN 03

CASE NUMBER
FD2003 0139

JARD'S J)ECISIONAL RATIONAL	'·	SSl3D..ONTIIBA A

4		BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITfED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
E D!SCHARG£ REVIEW BOARD riECI(lNJ\.llA1'1.0NALE. ..

REMARKS
Case beard at 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.

The Board did not change the Reason, Authority or the RE Code.

SIGNATIJRE OF RECORUER

DATE: 18 JUN oa

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002
Previous edition will be used.

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD03-00139	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for an Honorable Discharge, a Change in Reason and Authority for Discharge, and to change the Re-enlistment (RE) Code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to exercise this right.

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge to Honorable is approved. However, Change in Reason and Authority for discharge along with a change in the RE Code is denied.

ISSUE: Applicant contends that her discharge was too harsh because her Commander thought her failure in her CDC's was deliberate but she insists that her fai1ure was unintentional. The records indicate the applicant was discharged with a General discharge for Unsatisfactory Performance. Normally, when someone fails their CDC course and there is no other derogatory information in the file, they receive an Honorable discharge. After a thorough and complete consideration of the information submitted by the applicant and information contained in the record, the Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation and extenuation to substantiate upgrade of the discharge. However, the Board did not agree to change the applicant's Reason, Authority or RE Code.

CONCLUSIONS:  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 that the applicant was provided full administrative due process.

However, in view of the foregoing finding, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of the applicant's service is more accurately reflected by an honorable discharge. The Board concluded that the Reason and Authority of the applicant's discharge were appropriate due to the unsatisfactory academic performance. And, the RE Code is appropriate for someone discharged due to Unsatisfactory Performance.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief