AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
"NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

mene | avn

[TYPE GEN. [x PERSONAL APPEARANCE _ | RECORD REVIEW

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION { ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

  
 
  
   

  
  
 

AFSN/SSAN

 

MEMBER SITTING HON GEN voTHc | OTHER | DENY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
   

Pesce
ORDER APPOINTING THE B

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME O
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE

    
  

ISSUES A94.11 INDEX NUMBER A67.10

 

     
   

 

 

 

 

 

 

HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER

 

13 Apr 2004 - FD-2002-0010
Las artes a e aS a

 

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, and the right to submit an application to the AFBCMR.

hay

SIGNATURE OF RE

SAF/MRBR , SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 THe CHRMANDIIR EETInG TRDIECOOR
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

 

 

 

 

 

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

  

    
  

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | pp -5992-0010

 

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.

The applicant was scheduled for a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) at
Dobbins AFB, Georgia, in November, 2002, but did not respond to formal notification of the hearing date
and failed to appear without requesting a postponement. The applicant was again scheduled for a personal
appearance before the DRB at Fort Gillem, Georgia, in April 2004, but again failed to respond to formal
notification of the hearing date and did not request a postponement.

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 nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an
inequity or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

 
 

Issue 1. Applicant contends he was singled out and disciplined due to his racial background and geographic
upbringing. The records indicated the applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions after
receiving an Article 15, a vacation of suspended punishment, two Letters of Reprimand, six Records of
Individual Counseling and two Memoranda for Record documenting misconduct. These documents were
authored by seven different members of applicant’s chain of command. His infractions included numerous
instances of failure to go, dereliction of duty, stealing, and failing to pay just debts. Additionally, applicant
had an Enlisted Performance Report rated an overall referral “2” that extensively documented his lack of
maturity, poor judgment, inability to adapt to military life, and the negative effect he was having on his duty
section. At the time of the discharge, applicant consulted counsel and submitted a statement requesting
retention and cross-training, or in the alternative, an honorable discharge. The DRB was unable to find merit
in applicant’s claim of racial or cultural bias against him, and opined that through the unit’s extensive
administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his negative behavior. The Board
concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of all military members and the
characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was appropriate.

 
    
    
   
   
     
 

Issues 2 and 3. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the depression he suffered from
as a result of his grandmother’s, grandfather’s, and aunt’s death, all within a l-year period. Applicant also
inferred he was being treated for sleep disturbance, and noted he had been seen at the Mental Health clinic;
he claimed his counselor didn’t help him because the counselor also didn’t understand his background, and
that his first sergeant told him to “stick it out.” However, applicant’s service medical records were not
available for review and no other inequity or impropriety in his discharge could be found in the course of
reviewing the available records. The Board concluded the discharge was appropriate for the reasons which
were its basis and applicant’s misconduct appropriately characterized his term of service.

    
 
    
  

 
 

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
FD2002-0010
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(es (Former AMN) (HGH A1C)

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 00/04/06 UP AFI 36-3208,
para 5.49 (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions). Appeals for Honorable
Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 79/06/30. Enimt Age: 18 5/12. Disch Age: 20 9/12. Educ:HS DIPL.
AFOT: N/A. A-58, BE-46, G-36, M-65. PAFSC: 2A365 — Aircraft Pneudraulic
Systems Apprentice. DAS: 98/12/09.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 97/12/08 —- 98/06/09 (6 months 2 days) (Inactive).

3 SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Enlisted as Alc 98/06/10 for 4 yrs. Svd: 01 Yrs 09 Mo 27 Das, all AMS.
b. Grade Status: AMN - 99/08/19 (Article 15, 99/08/19)
ec. Time Lost: none.

d. Art 15's: (1) 99/11/05, Vacation, McConnell AFB, KS - Article 86.
You did, on or about 15 Oct 99, without authority, fail
to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of
duty. Forfeiture of $250.00 pay per month for two
months. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

(2) 99/08/19, McConnel AFB, KS - Article 121. You, did, on
or about 23 Jul 99, steal merchandise, of a value of
about $174.94, the property of the -------- . Article
134. You, being indebted to ------- in the sum of
$155.00 for auto repair services, which amount became
due and payable on 1 Aug 99, did, on or about 1 Aug 99,
dishonorably fail to pay said debt. Reduction to Amn.
Forfeiture of $250.00 pay per month for two months
(suspended until 18 Feb 99), and 45 days extra duty.
(Appeal/Denied) (No mitigation)

e. Additional: MFR, 29 APR 99 - Failure to pay just debt.
RIC, 18 MAY 99 - Failure to go.
RIC, 24 MAY 99 - Failure to go.
LOR, 28 MAY 99 - Failure to go.
RIC, 26 JUL 99 - Failure to go.
RIC, 20 SEP 99 - Failure to go.
MFR, 30 SEP 99 - Failure to go.
LOR, 21 DEC 99 —- Dereliction of duty.
FD2002-0010

RIC, 21 DEC 99 - Dereliction of duty.
RIC, 22 FEB 00 - Failure to go.

f. CM: none.

g. Record of SV: 98/06/10 - 00/02/09 McConnell AFB 2 (Initial)
(Discharged from McConnell AFB)

h. Awards & Decs: AFTR, AFOQUA.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (02) Yrs (03) Mos (29) Das
TAMS: (O01) Yrs (09) Mos (27) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appin (DD Fm 293) dtd 01/12/20.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

ATCH

1. Memorandum For 22 MSS/DPMPE, 21 Jan 00.
2. Memorandum for Record, 24 Jan 00.

3. Memorandum for Record, 14 Feb 00.

4. Memorandum for Record, 22 MKS/CC, 15 Oct 99.
5. AF Form 3545.

6. Letter of Reprimand, 21 Dec 99.

7. Personal Statement.

8. Medical Report.

9. Eight Training Certificates.

10. Report on Individual Person.

11. DD Form 214.

02/04/24/ia
2O00Z- BOO

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS 22D AIR REFUELING WING (AMC)

STAFF JUDGE ADVOCATE
McCONNELL AIR FORCE BASE, KANSAS

 

MEMORANDUM FOR 22 ARW/CC

FROM: 22 ARW/JA

 

SUBJECT: Involuntary Discharge — A

1. FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES: On 23 March 2000, Major