Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | DRB | CY2001 | FD01-00018
Original file (FD01-00018.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECTSTONAL RATTONALIE 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-[)! -0001 8 

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable 
The  applicant  was  offered  a  personal  appearance  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  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 is denied. 

The  Board  finds  that  neither  the  evidence  of record  or  that  provided  by  the  applicant  substantiates  an 
inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of the discharge. 

Issues  Applicant  was discharged for misconduct,  minor disciplinary  infractions  He had  seven Letters of 
Reprimand,  for Records of Individual  Counseling, and an Article  15 with five different offenses  included. 
His  misconduct  included  multiple  incidences  of failure  to go  or  being  late  to  work,  missing  mandatory 
formations, failure to keep his dormitory room clean in accordance with published  standards.  dereliction of 
duty,  curfew  and  restriction  violations,  failure  to  obey  orders,  making  a  false  official  statement,  and 
disrespect to a student  leader.  Member's  reply to the discharge  action  requested  retention, and probation 
and  rehabilitation,  both  of  which  were  denied.  Applicant  now  contends  he  was  forced  to  incriminate 
himself when making a statement by virtue of his supervisor ordering him to answer questions, that he was 
the  victim  of  illegal  dormitory  inspections  that  amounted  to  illegal  search  and  seizure,  and  that  other 
members of his unit  similarly situated were not treated as harshly  as he was.  The record  reflects that the 
applicant responded to most of the disciplinary  actions taken against him, usually admitting his misconduct 
and promising to do better in the future.  Member also had  military l e p l  counsel. and at no point during the 
disciplinary  or  discharge  proceedings  did  he  raise  the  issues  he  raises  now.  The  Board  found  these 
contentions to be without merit.  Applicant's offenses were numerous and well documented.  They occurred 
over a  5-month period  and  the various  disciplinary actions taken  were  given  in  an  effort  to  rehabilitate 
member. 
The  documented  infractions  support  the 
characterization of service he received  No inequity or impropriety was found in his discharge in the course 
of the records review. 

He  was  either  unwilling  or  unable  to  improve. 

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 chansed. 

Attachment: 
Examiner's Brief 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 

ANDREWS AFB, MD 

ED-01-00018 

(Former AB) MISSING DOCUMENTS 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd  a GEN Disch fr USAF 99/10/28 UP AFI 36-3208, 
para 5.49 (Misconduct -  Minor Disciplinary Infractions).  Appeals for Honorable 
Disch. 

2.  aACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 78/08/30.  Enlmt Age: 20 1/12.  Disch Age: 21 1/12. Educ:HS DIPL. 

AFQT: N/A.  A-56,  E-75,  G-66,  M-68. PAFSC: 2Alll -  Avionic Sensors Maintenance 
Hslper. DAS: 99/04/12. 

b.  Prior Sv: AFRes 98/10/29 -  98/11/09 (11 days) (Inactive). 

3.  SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Enld as AB 98/11/10 for 6 yrs.  Svd: 0 Yrs 11 Mo 20 Das, all AMs. 
b.  Grade Status:  AB -  99/09/02 (Article 15, 99/09/02) 

AMN/AlC -  Unknown. 

c.  Time Lost:  none. 

d.  Art 15's:  (1) 99/09/02, Sheppard AFB, TX -  Article 86.  You did, o/a 
18 Aug 99, w/o auth, fail to go at the time prescribed 
to your appointed place of duty at which you were 
required to be, to wit: Building 690 morning formation. 
Article 92.  You did, o/a 18 Aug  99, violate a lawful 
general instruction, to wit: para 2.1.3., Sheppard AFB 
Instruction 36-2902, dated 15 Oct 97, by wrongfully 
failing to keep dormitory room in inspection order at 
all times.  You did, o/a  18 Aug  99, violate a lawful 
general instruction, to wit: para 5.2.5., Sheppard AFB 
Instruction 36-2902, dated 15 Oct 97, by wrongfully 
failing to return to and remain in your assigned 
dormitory room from 2100-0400.  You did, o/a 25 Aug  99, 
violate a lawful general instruction, to wit: para 
5.2.3., Sheppard AFB Instruction 36-2902, dated 15 Oct 
97, by wrongfully entering a privately owned vehicle. 
You did, o/a 25 Aug  99, violate a lawful general 
instruction, to wit: para 2.4., Sheppard AFB Instruction 
36-2902, dated 15 Oct 97, by wrongfully failing to 
remain on Sheppard AFB at all times.  Rdn to AB, 
forfeiture of  $479.00 pay per month  for 2 months  (in 
excess of $350.00 pay per month for 2 months suspended 
until 01 Mar 2000), 30 days restriction, and 30 days 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0362

    Original file (FD2002-0362.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    She had two AETC Fo Discrepancy Report, SIX Records of Individual Counseling, four Letters of Reprimand, and an A failing to keep her dormitory room in inspection order on two occasions, failing to observe curfew hours on three occasions, making a false statement, disrespect to a noncommissioned officer, disrupting Jer class while they were testing, engaging in horseplay in class, and failure to go to a mandatory appoint ent. The respondent received an Article 15, four Letters of Reprimand,...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0295

    Original file (FD2002-0295.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    : CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0295 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the Reason for discharge and change the RE Code. Time Lost: 25 Dec 97 - 28 Dec 97 (4 Days) d. Art 15’s: (1) 98/01/12, Sheppard AFB, Tx - Article 86. We have reviewed this discharge case file and find it to be legally sufficient to support discharge.

  • AF | DRB | CY2007 | FD2006-00329

    Original file (FD2006-00329.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    M U 20162-1002 AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 Previous edition will be used AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASE NUMBER FD-2006-00329 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. LOR, 20 JUL 00 - Failure to return and remain in dormitory from 2100-0400 on nights prior to duty day. You, who knew or should have h o w n of your duties at Sheppard AFB TX, on or about 22 Apr 00, were derelict in the performance of those duties, by sleeping in your room...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0121

    Original file (FD2002-0121.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (Change Discharge to Honorable) Issue 1: I feel that I was given proper punishment for my actions, but I also feel that I have learned from my actions. For this misconduct, the respondent received an AF 174 on 16 Feb 00. c. The respondent did, at or near Sheppard AFB TX, between on or about 18 Jan 00 and on or about 22 Jan 00, wrongfully appropriate the Sheppard Inn, Bldg 633, room 7145, of a value of less than $100.00, the property of the USAF. For this infraction, you received an AF Form...

  • AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0292

    Original file (FD2002-0292.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

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

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00116

    Original file (FD2006-00116.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) ............................ SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: a. Enlisted as AB 26 Mar 97 for 4 yrs. The commander exercising SPCM j jurisdiction or higher authority will decide whether you will be discharged or retained in the Air Force and, if you are discharged, how your service will be characterized; If you are discharged, you will be ineligible for reenlistment in t h e ~ i r Force and will...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0403

    Original file (FD2002-0403.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Air Force. ?s discharge from the !should be discharged with - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A% i :that she was 2. Attachment: Case File DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND FDZQBZ - o ~ 0 2 - 9 Mar 2000 MEMORANDUM FOR AB i L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . '

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0318

    Original file (FD2002-0318.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    -- AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE CASK NIIMHER FD02-03 18 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable and to change the Reason and Authority for discharge. The record indicates the applicant received two Article 15's for wrongfully possessing alcoholic beverages in the dormitory and willfully failed to remain within the 150-mile radius of Sheppard AFR. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND F D Z ~ X - & ~ [ , 3 April...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2001-0466

    Original file (FD2001-0466.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The records indicated the applicant received an Article 15 for violating a lawful instruction by entering the dormitory quarters of a member of the opposite sex, an Article 15 for disrespectful language toward a superior NCO, a Letter of Counseling for failing to use a Technical Order, a Letter of Counseling for not using the chain of command, a Letter of Counseling for using tobacco products in a military facility, and eight Letters of Counseling for being late for work. The award was...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00180

    Original file (FD2003-00180.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant contends her discharge was improper because of errors in disciplinary documentation, her supervisor illegally obtained her hotel receipts, and incorrect counseling regarding re-classification into alternate career fields. Legal counsel also found no evidence the applicant's supervisor acted illegally in obtaining a hotel receipt. (Change Discharge to Honorable) ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF Atch 1.