COUNSEL.

A95.00

 

HEARING DATE

5 NOV 02

 

TQ:

 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

 

MEMBERS SITTING

 

rei S| OM)

INDEX NUMBER

A67.90

CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0191

PERSONAL APPEARANCE

GRADE AFSN/SSAN

   
 
  

    

X RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

 

J ii ii

VOTE OF THE BOARD

HON GEN YvOTHC OTHER DENY

 

 

 

 

 

Be EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TOTHEBOARD
ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

 

COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

 

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

 

 

 

APPLICANT'S ISSUE AND.THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

 

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

SIGNATURE OF RECO

ENDORSEMENT

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

SIGNATURE OF BOARD PRESIDENT

 

DATE: 5 NOV 02

 

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

FROM:
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3®° FLOOR
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 FD02-0191

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

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

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

FINDINGS: Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The board finds that the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge,
and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was able to identify none that would justify a change of
discharge.

ISSUE: The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the
available service record. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or
inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. The records indicated applicant received an
Article 15 for being disorderly. He also received four Letters of Reprimand and three letters of Counseling
for financial irresponsibility (three times), sleeping on duty, failure to go, causing a domestic disturbance
and damage to government property, and reporting for mobility processing without all of his required
uniforms. The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities
to change his negative/repetitive behavior. The Board concluded the disciplinary infractions were a
significant departure from the conduct expected of all military members. The Board found no evidence of
impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.

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~-0191
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(Former SGT) (HGH SGT)

 

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 90/12/10 UP APR 39-10,
para 5-47b (Pattern of Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and
Discipline). Appeals for a Change in Reason and Authority for Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 65/06/04. Enlmt Age: 19 0/12. Disch Age: 25 6/12. Educ:HS DIPL.
AFQT: N/A. A-72, E-14, G-43, M-27. PAFSC: 64550 - Inventory Management
Specialist. DAS: 85/04/02.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 84/04/18 - 84/12/11 (7 months 24 days) (Inactive).

(2) Enlisted as AB 84/12/12 for 4 yrs. Svd: 3 yrs 3 months
23 days, all AMS. AMN - 85/06/12. AIC - 86/04/12. SRA - 87/12/12. APRs: 9,9.

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Reenlisted as SrA 88/04/05 for 4 yrs. Svd: 02 Yrs 08 Mo 05 Das, all

b. Grade Status: Sgt - 88/12/01
c. Time Lost: none.

d. Art 15’s: (1) 90/10/30, Dover AFB, DE - Article 134. In that you,
were, on or about 13 Oct 90, disorderly, which conduct
was of a nature to bring discredit upon the Armed
Forces. Reprimand and 14 days extra duty. (No appeal)
(No mitigation)

e. Additional: LOR, 30 APR 87 - Sleeping on duty.

VBC, 18 FEB 88 - Failure to meet financial obligations.

LOR, 10 OCT 89 ~ Failure to go.

LOR, 23 FEB 90 - Causing a domestic disturbance and damage
to government property.

LOC, 20 JUL 90 ~- Reporting for mobility processing without
all of required uniforms.

LOR, 20 JUL 90 - Failure to pay just debts.

VBC, 06 AUG 90 - Failure to pay just debts.

f. CM: none.

q. Record of SV: 87/12/12 - 88/05/16 Dover AFB 9 (CRO)
89/05/17 - 89/05/16 Dover AFB 9 (Annual)
89/05/17 - 90/03/31 Dover AFB 3 (HAF Dir)
FD2002-0191

(Discharged from Dover AFB)
h. Awards & Decs: AFTR, AFGCM, AFLSAR.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (06) Yrs (07) Mos (23) Das
TAMS: (05) Yrs (11) Mos (29) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/04/28.
(Change Discharge to Reason and Authority for Discharge)

Issue 1: From Section 3. I'm not requesting a change in my discharge, I am
requesting a removal of statement on my DD 214. Section 28 narrative reason for
discharge enclosed is my DD 214 statement is documented all I ask it be removed
because this was not a reflection of my work. Those were true back then not
now. I believe it is hindering my effects to obtain employment. All assistance
in this matter is greatly appreciated.

ATCH
1. DD Form 214.

02/08/14/ia
EP pioo2-~- 0/7 /

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS TWENTY-FIRST AIR FORCE IMAC)

MCGUIRE AIR FORCE BASE. NJ 98641-5002

 

99 NOV 1990

REPLY TO =
ATTN OF. ‘
oe

SUBIECT: Conditional Waiver - AFR 39-10 Discharge Action - @—i——i—tiis,
—wuniiaggupmeen 436 SUPS, Dover AFB DE

TO cc

1. This case is before you for your action as the separation authority under
AFR 39-10, para 5-51. On 16 Nov 90 the 436 SUPS/CCO initiated administrative
discharge action against the respondent under AFR 39-10, para 5-47b, a pattern
of misconduct. The section commander recommended separation from the

Air Force with an under than honorable conditions discharge without probation
and rehabilitation (P&R). On 17 Nov 90 the respondent submitted a waiver of
his right to a board hearing, contingent upon his receipt of no less than a
general discharge, On 27 Nov 90 the special court-martial convening
authority, 436 C8G/CC, recommended acceptance of respondent's conditional
waiver and that he be discharged with a general discharge without P&R. You
have the following options:

a. Retain the respondent in the Air Force; or

b. Reject the conditional waiver, in which case processing will continue
according to AFR 39-10; or

c. Accept respondent's conditional waiver and order that the respondent
be discharged for misconduct with an honorable or general discharge, with or
without P&R.

2. Facts:

 

a. Personal Data: ati. is 25 years old. His current enlistment
began on 5 Apr 88 and he has 6 years of active military service. His APRs
have been rated 9, 9, 9, 9, 9 and he has an EPR rated 3. He is entitled to
wear the Air Force Good Conduct Medal, the Air Force Training Ribbon, and the
Air Force Longevity Service Award.

b. For the Government: A preponderance of the evidence has established
that the following events occurred during the respondent's current enlistment.
This information may be considered to determine whether the respondent is sub-
ject to discharge, whether he should be discharged, and if discharged, the
character of discharge. The respondent has the following record of
misconduct:

MAC ~— THE BACKBONE OF DETERRENCE
Fp 2002-0 1F [

 

Date Incident Action
13 Oct 90 Disorderly in Station Article 15
6 Aug 90 Overdue NCO Club Debt Verbal Counseling
20 Jul 90 Failure to Pay Debt Letter of Reprimand
21 Jun 90 Reported to Mobility Letter of Counseling

Processing Unprepared

19 Feb 90 Domestic Disturbance and Letter of Reprimand
Damaging Base Housing

3 Oct 89 Failure to Go Letter of Reprimand

A preponderance of the evidence has also established the following events
which occurred prior to the respondent's current enlistment. This information
may be considered to determine whether he should be discharged if the above
information is determined to render the respondent subject to discharge. It
may not be used to determine character of discharge.

 

Date Incident Action

29 Mar 88 Failure to Pay Debt Verbal Counseling
17 Feb 88 Failure to Pay Debt Verbal Counseling
26 Apr 87 Sleeping on Duty Letter of Reprimand

c. For the Respondent: Respondent has not submitted matters for your
consideration. He is entitled but not required to do so,

3+ Errors and Irregularities: The letter of notification to the respondent
includes as a reason for the discharge the three events described above which
occurred prior to his current enlistment. Only matters in the current enlist-
ment may form the basis for discharge unless the unit commander did not know
of the matters before the reenlistment, The special court-martial convening
authority was aware of the irregularity and explicitly based his decision on
proper matters, This irregularity will cause no prejudice to the rights of
the respondent if your decisions in this case are made in accordance with the
rules stated in paragraph 2 above. In addition, Sgt Walker indicated in his
letter acknowledging receipt of notification of this action that he would be
subject to discharge with an honorable discharge as a result of the action.
He was in fact subject to receiving an under other than honorable conditions
discharge, However, his offer of a conditional waiver makes it clear that he
understood correctly what he was subject to. The case has otherwise been
processed in compliance with AFR 39-10 and is legally sufficient to support
the discharge of the respondent. ‘
Po L402- 8/77

4. Recommendation: The evidence in this case establishes a basis for dis~
charge for misconduct under para 5-47b. I recommend that you accept
eames. conditional waiver and order him discharged for a pattern of

misconduct under para 5-47b with a general discharge without P&R.

  
   

 

Sgn

2 Atch
l. Proposed 21 AF/CC Ltr
2e Case File

Staee/ Judge AdVocate
CONSTITUT a,
a
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE of "ey
HEADQUARTERS 436TH COMBAT SUPPORT GROUP (MAC) 2 %
DOVER AIR FORCE GASE, DEL AWARE 19902 3 ¥
» «
4 E
4 “
= £
*
a,
4 *
Téeny ow oe
REPLY TO
ATTN OF: JA

SUBJECT: Legal Review of AFR 39-19 Discharge,

 

To: ce

1. BASIS FOR ACTION: This discharge action was initiated
against MM under AFR 39-19, paragraph 5-47b, for a
pattern of misconduct, specifically, conduct prejudicial to
good order and discipline. I have reviewed the file and find
it legally sufficient to support the respondent's discharge.

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Respondent enlisted in the Air
Force on 18 April 1984 under the delayed enlistment program
and came on active duty on 12 December 1984. His current
four-year enlistment started on 5 April 1988. He has been
assigned to the 436th SUPS since 2 April 1985. na has
received five APRs, all rated as overall nine and one EPR
rated as an overall three. He is entitled to wear the Air
Force Training Ribbon, the Air Force Longevity Service Award
Ribbon, and the Air Force Good Conduct Medal. Respondent was
notified of his commander's recommendation for discharge on 16
November 1999, In that notification letter, he was correctly
informed that the worst type of discharge he could receive was
an under other than honorable conditions discharge (UOTHC).
When he acknowledged receipt of the notification letter, he

incorrectly stated that the worst type of discharge he could
receive was an honorable discharge. On 17 November 1996,

respondent consulted counsel and submitted a waiver of his
right to an administrative discharge board hearing conditioned
on his receiving not less than a general discharge. fThus, it
is obvious Qa correctly understands he could receive a
UOTHC discharge as a result of this action,

3. EVIDENCE: Respondent has been in and out of trouble
during his current enlistment. On 3 October 1989, he was late
to work and received a letter of reprimand (LOR). On 19

February 199 0, inal: was involved in a domestic
disturbance which resulted in his kicking a hole in a bedroom
door of his base quarters. He was given a LOR on 23 February
1998. On 21 June 1990, 
.2002z- O/F/

9, Execute the attached acknowledgement and return it to me immediately,

 
    

; WORF, Capt, USAF 9 Atchs
Squadron Section Commander 1. LOR, dated 30 April 1987
2. MFR, dated 18 February 1988
3. Court Order dated 9 February
1988 w/atch
4. LOR, dated 10 October 1989
5. LOR, dated 23 February 1990
6. LOC, dated 20 July 1990
7. LOR, dated 20 July 1990
8. SSF FL-8, dated 6 August 1990
9. AF FM 3070, date 30 October
1