,.	AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)	GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

SRA
TYPE   GEN	I	PERSONAL     APPEARANCE	x	I	RECORD    REVIEW

" .·••. C0'.l.Jlj!SE .\;OJ;. NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION
YES	No
x

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATJON OF COUNSEL

MEMBER SITTING

'

·'--------------------------------- .'

HON

GEN

UOTHC

OTHER

DENY
x

h
''	x
,...:
''	x
i..:
''	x
,...:
''	x
---------------------------------- '

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMBER	A84.00

1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3	LETTER OF NOTIFJCA TION
4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDJTJONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TJME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

HEARING  DATE	CASE NUMBER

30 Nov 2004	FD-2004-00278

Case heard 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

-•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••J ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

!

-1

''	•,		-1
'" :--,- - ::·.-, - - - - - - .-.	. .i(."- " ]'..- -·-:·"iNi)6ii.SiMi;Nt"·:·- - - - - ••-.-" - •"- - - - - - - - - ·- ··· . -. ·.--.;-" ·i58'1if -i211i61)4>:' ,. :i! .t . . ,. . ·'>..	/:
TOo	FROMo

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

SECRETARY Of THE AIR FORCE :PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE  REVJEW  BOARD 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, l\ID 20762-7002

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00	(EF-V2)	Previous edition will be used

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-2004-00278	

GENERAL: The applicant  appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and 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 to exercise this right.

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge and change of reason and authority for discharge, and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The reason the applicant states it was too harsh is because he felt pressured to separate from the military due to fear of losing his civilian job. The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for misconduct. The DRB opined that based on presumption of regularity and information provided by the Air National Guard, the applicant failed to participate satisfactorily in the Tennessee Air National Guard accumulating nine or more unexcused absences within a 12-month period. The Board concluded this was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate.

If the applicant can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.  If he should choose to exercise his right to a personal appearance hearing, the applicant should be prepared to provide the DRB with factual evidence of the inequity and any exemplary post-service accomplishments as well as any contributions to the community.  Pertinent information that would be useful in a public appearance would include specifics about employer difficulties and what actions the applicant took through his military chain of command to get relief for difficulties encountered with his civilian employer.

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 there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief