AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
GRADE	AFSN/SSAN

SrA

RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

X*+ X*+

ISSUES

A94.05

INDEX NUMllEI-!

A84.00

EASE TO THE BOARD
EXHIBITS SUBMJTnm AT TIME OF
PPEARANCE
DTNG OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE HEARlNG

HEARING  llATE

CASE NUMllER

Case heard in Washington, D.C.

Advise appl icant of the decision of the Board and the right to subm it an application to the A FBCMR. Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request.
*Reason and Authority
+Reenlistment Code

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

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

FROM•

(EF-V2)

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AIR FORCE DISCllARGE REVIEW BOARD
!SJS COMMAND DR, EE WING, JRD FLOOR ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7001

Previous

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD-200900162	

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel,  at Andrews AFB on 03 Jun 2010.

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: Exhibit #	·Applicant's   Contentions

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 reason and authority for discharge and change of reenlistment code are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant  substantiates  an inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

ISSUE: Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because it was too harsh. The records indicated the applicant accumulated twenty unexcused absences between May  1998 and September  1998.  Additionally, he failed to meet his personal obligations by not paying the debt of $71.87 he incurred on his Government American Express card. The primary reason for discharge was his  unsatisfactory  participation.  The applicant testified that he was unsatisfied with his duties. He spoke to his first sergeant about this dissatisfaction and asked what could be done. The applicant testified  that  one of  the  options  the first sergeant provided him was to stop participati ng. The applicant further testified that the first sergeant told him that he would not go to jail, but would be discharged if he stopped participating. While the applicant may have not been fully informed of the full ramifications  of taking the non-participation course of action, the DRB opined that the applicant knowingly chose to not participate and got what he wanted - out of the Air Force Reserve without going to jail. The DRB did not find a general  discharge for failing to fulfill his obligation to the Air Force reserve to be inequitable. The Board concluded that the negative aspects of the applicant's service outweighed the positive contributi ons he made in his Air Force career. The DRB was pleased to see that the applicant was bettering himself through his educational accomplishments. However, no inequity or impropriety in  his discharge was suggested or found in the course of the hearing. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant, the narrative reason and, reenlistment code were found to be appropriate.

CONCLUSION: 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 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