AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

AlC

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

x	+
x	+
x	+

x	+

ISSUES

X+

A94.56	INDEX NUMBER

2	APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
4   BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO TIIE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARING

HEARING DATE	CASE NUMBER

29 Jun 2009	FD-2008-00189

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.

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.

+ Reenlistment Code denied

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

SECRETARY OF TllE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 26762·7001

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2008-00189	

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reenlistment code.

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

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

FINDINGS: The Board grants the change of the discharge characterization from general discharge to honorable discharge; the change of reenlistment code is denied.

ISSUE:

Applicant contends discharge was inequitable "because it was based on one isolated incident in 18 months of service." The records indicated the applicant was discharged under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.26.3: Failure to progress in on-the-job training. The applicant scored a 21 percent on his first Career Development Course (CDC) and a 42 percent on his second CDC, below the passing score of 65 percent. Although the Board found the administrative discharge of the applicant was appropriate, a majority of the Board found that the applicant's service generally met Air Force standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty as described in AFI 36-3208, paragraph 1.18: Honorable Service Characterization; therefore, the Board determined that the applicant's discharge should be upgraded to Honorable. The Board overwhelming found that the applicant's two time failure on CDC tests did not warrant a general discharge characterization.
Because the record showed the applicant was given ample opportunity to study for his CDC tests; yet, failed both tests by a considerable margin, the Board found that the applicant's reentry code should not be changed.

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.

In view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of applicant's service is more accurately  reflected by an Honorable discharge under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553. However, the applicant's request to change his reentry code is denied.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief