AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

x

 

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE ENITIAL) GRADE | AFSN/SSAN
aah AMN | <0RRRuer-
TYPE — a
X PERSONAL APPEARANCE RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL. RAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANLZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION (Ht CCUMSEL,
¥ES "| NO

 

VOTE OF THE RGAE

 

 

Hon GEN OTHER DENY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

j SITTING UOTHC
Xx
x
seocteneenne smn
x
X
x
ISSUES INDEX NUMBER : _EXHEEITS SUBMITTED TO THR BOARD
A92.21, 93.01, A93.19, AG67,90 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A94.05 9 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 | LETTEROFNOTIFICATION
[ WRARING DATE 0 EASE AMER 4 | DRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
10 SEP 02 FD2000-00226 COUNSBE"S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
oo" ADITHONAL EXMIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PRRBSOMAI APYBARANCE
TAPE RECOKDING OF PERSONAL APFERANCE HEARING

 

 

 

REMARKS
Case heard at Randolph AFB, Texas

APPLICANT’? SUE AND THE BGARDS DRCISIONAT. RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DLACHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE,

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

 

 

SIGNATURE CF RECUR

TNDONRSEMENT

 

 

 

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

 

FROM:

 

AFHGQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00

(EV-V2)

SECRETARY OF TIE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL.
AIR FORCE DISCIIARGE REVIEW BOARD

1535 COMMAND DR, HE WING, 3°” FLOOR

ANDREWS AFB, MID 20762-70102

 

Previous edition will be used.

4

hy

 

DATE: 10 SEF 02
CASE NUMBER

 
   
 
 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2000-00226

   

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable, change the reason and authority
for discharge and change the RE Code.

     

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at
Randolph AFB, TX on September 10, 2002. The followmg additional exhibits were submitted at the

hearing:

 
     
 
   
 

Exhibit 5: Applicant’s contentions.
Exhibit 6: AFAM justification package

Exhibit 7: Winnemucca police department character letter

Exhibit 8: Winnemucca police department promotion announcement

    
   
   
 

The attached bnief 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
impropriety that would justify upgrade of the discharge.

  
 
  

  

ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a General Discharge for Misconduct - Pattern of Conduct
Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline, The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of
impropnety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge. The records indicated the
applicant received two Article 15"s for being disorderly and a Vacation action under the UCM] for being
disorderly. He also received two Letiers of Reprmand for thefl and disorderly conduct. The applicant
contends that his discharge was too harsh because his proficiency marks were pretty good, the offenses
were minor and resulted from a lack of judgment because hc was impaired by immaturity and alcohol use.
Ie also states that he has been a good citizen since his discharge and has a career in law enforcement. 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 Board noticed the performance ratings: however, the negative aspects of
the offenses outweigh the positive contributions he made during his service. On the minor offenses, the
Board opined that through the administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change his
ncegative/repetitive behavior. The many offenses of the applicant, although minor in nature when analyzed
individually, mounted to an overall serious problem that could not be tolerated. The Board concluded the
misconduct was a significant departure from conduct of all military members. The Board recognized the
applicant’s efforts to support his family, his successful rehabilitation, his job as a police officer and the
pride he took in being a member of the United States military; however, no inequity or impropricty in his
discharge was suggested or found in the course of the records review and in the questioning of the
applicant. The Board concluded that the character of and reason for discharge were appropriate due to his

misconduct,

 
   
     
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
     
  
 

  

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Revicw 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.

 
  
     

Atlachment:
Examiner's Bnef
FD-00-00226
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFR, MD

ey (Pormcire AMN)

1, MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl ree’d a GEN Diseh fr USAF 86/12/23 UP AFR 39-10,
para 5-47b (Misconducl. - Pattern of Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and
Discipline). Appeals for Honorable Diseh, Chg KE Code, Chg Rsn & Aulh for Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 64/02/29, Enlmt Age: 18 4/12. Diseh Age: 22 9/12. Educ:HS DIP,
AFOT: N/A. A-75, E-90, G-88, M98. PAFSC: 81150 - Security Specialist.
DAS: 85/06/29,

hb. Prior Sv: AFRes 82/07/15 - 83/01/23 (6 months 9 days) (Inactive).
3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Enld as AB 83/01/24 for 4 yrs. Svd: 3 Yrs 11] Mo 0 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AMN - 86/12/11 (Article 15, 86/12/11)
AlC - 86/05/01 (Article 15, Vacation, 86/03/30)
SRA - 86/01/24
Alc - 84/01/24
AMN - 83/07/24

ec. Time Lost: none.

dad. Art. 18's: (1) 86/12/11, RAF Fairford, UK - Article 134. ‘You were, o/a
29 Mov 46, disorderly, which cenduct was of a nature to
bring discredit upon the armed forces. fedn to Amn,
forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for one month.

(No appeal) (No mitigation)

(2) 86/09/30, Vacation, RAF Fairford, UK ~ Article 134.
That ofa 15 Aug 86, you were again disorderly in
conduct, that has led me to give you a letter of
reprimand. Rdn to AlC. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

(3) 86/05/01, BAF Fairford, UK - Article 134. You were, ofa
¢ Apr 86, diserderly, which conduct was of a nature to
bring diseredit upon the armed forces, Rdnd to Alc
(susp til 31 Oct 86), and forfeiture of $100.00 pay per
mnonih for ane month. (Noa appeal) (No mitigation)

e. Additional: Lor, 09 OC! 86 - Theft.
LOR, 30 SEP 86 0 Disorderly conduct.

ff. CM: none,
FDOO-002276
gq. Record of SV: 83/01/24 84/01/23 F.E. Warren ALB 8 (Annual}
84/01/24 Se inaiee F_E. Warren AFR G (CRO)
84/05/23 5/04/25 F.E. Warren ALB 9 (CRO)
g5/04d/26 56) adioe RAF Fairford Y (Annual)
86/04/24 HO/10/16 BAF Fair Cord 7 (CRO)

(Discharged from MeGuire AFB)
h. Awards & Nees: AFGOM, APTR, ABFOUA.

Mos {93) Das

i, Shin of Sv: TMS: (4) Yrs (5)
11) Mos (0) Das

VAMS: (3) Yrs (

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 00/03/23.
(Change Discharge to llonerable Diseh, Chg BE Code, Chy Ran & Auth for Disch)

Issue i: The following issues are the reasons 1 believe my discharge should
be upgraded ta Ilonorable. If you disagree, please explain in detail why you
disagree. The presumpLion of regularity that might normally permit you to
assume thal Lhe Service acted correctiy in characterizing my service as less
than Honorable does not apply toa my vase because of the evidence I am sumitting.
My average conduct and proticiency marks were pretty good. Attached are aapics
of my Airman Performance Reports. A review of these documents indicates that my
duty performance or my conduect while on duty was never an issue. My duty
performance was always termed as ageeptable or better.

issue 2: My record of ArLicle 158 indicates only minor offenses. Attached
are copies af Article 15 actions against me. A review will indicate that. these
violations were minor, and resulted from a lack of Judgement rather than
malicious intent or a disregard for authority.

Issue 3: My ability to serve was impaired by my immaturity. As mentioned
above, my lack of mature judgement with respect to my off duty conduct had a
negative impact on my career.

Issue 4: My use of alcohol impaired my ability to serve. Again, as
mentioned above, I was not able to make mature decisions as Lo my use of alcohol
when off duty.

Issue 5; My discharge was based on several ottenses, but they were only
minor offenses. I received Lhree letlers of Reprimand and two Article 15 Non
Judicial Punishments while on active duty. All but one LOR were received in the
last seven months of service, All were very minor ineidents and all were
alcohol related. -

Tssue 6: I have been a good citizen sinee discharge. In 1987, about twa
weeks after being discharged, I began a career in Law Enforcemenl. I am still
employed in that. field, and have been with my current employer over five years.
T hold the rank of Sergeant and T supervise one of the departments night shifts.
IT alse Jéad Lhe SWAT Team and have duties as a training officer, AflLer over
five years with my previous employer, 1 held the rank of Sergeant with thal.
agency alse. 1 was responsible tor training, and supervising DetLonkion
Communications, and Tnvestigatians, | alse was a Deputy Coroner, and taught on
FDOO-00226

a regular basis at the State of Nevada Law Entorcement Acanemy. JT alitand a
lecal church with my family, | gal sober in 1990 and ne lenger use aleohel. 7
am al. Lhe point in my life where the prospect. of telling my kids why 1 doen't
have an Honorable Discharge hanging an the wall is not an attractive one. |
have made some changes Lhat lL should have made long ago. Your patience is
appreciated.

ATCH

1. Applicant's Issues.

Three Character References.

Five Airman Performance Reports.

Artiela 15, Ll Dec #4.

Letter of Reprimand, 09 Oct #6.

Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment, 30 Sep 86.
Letter af Reprimand, 30 Sep 66.

Article 15, O01 May 86,

9. Justificalion for Air Force Achievement Medal.
10 Four Letters of Apprecialior.

11. DD Form 214.

Ee

oo 2h iA to os

O0/O06/13/ia
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS 7020TH AIR BASE GROUP (USAFE)
APO NEW YORK 09125-5000

 

REPLY TQ

ATIN OF: JA a - 18 December 1986

suavect: Legal Review of AFR 39-10 Discharge ~ sie,

TO: cc

lL. Facts. This is an administrative discharge action initiated under AFR 39-
10, Chapter 5, Section H, paragraph 5-47b. ‘The underlying basis for this
action is conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.

2. Discussion. @eQeiiiig received notice of the discharge action on 15 Dec
46 and he has consulted an attorney on the subject. He has not submitted a
written statement for consideration. He is medically qualified for discharge.

3. Errors. None noted.

4. Opinion. This file supports the commander's recommendation that he be
discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The evidence
provides adequate support for the issuance of a general discharge. (iit

—_irer commander has recomended that he be issued no probation and rehabili-
tation. As the diacharge authority, you may direct that he receive a general
discharge with or without probation and rehabilitation, or that he be retained
in the Air Force. You may recommend that he receive an honorable discharge
with orcwithout probation and rehabilitation te the general court-martial
convening authority, who would then become the discharge authority. If you
feel an under other than honorable conditions discharge is warranted you may
return the package for reinitiation. He would be entitled to an administra~
tive board hearing if that action were taken.

5. Recommendation. I recommend that seyeieeeingiame be discharged from

the United States Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 5,
Section H, paragraph 5-47b, that he not be considered a candidate for probation

‘and rehabilitation under the provisions of Chapter 7, AFR 39~10, and that his
. service be characterized as general.

 

Staff Judge Advocate

Right Peoplg, Right Mission. Right Now.
frei 2RE

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

7020 SECURITY POLICE SQUADRON (USAFE)
APO NEW YORK 059125 5000

 

REPLY TO
ATTH OF; cc

15 December 1986

SUBJECT: § | atter ‘of Notification

TQ:

 

i. TI am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for
conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. The authority for this
action 1s AFR 39-10 paragraph 5-47b. If my recommendation is approved, your

_ service will be charcterized as honorable or general. [ am recommending that
your service be characterized as general.

2. My reason for this action are; On 11 Dec 86, you recefved punishment under
Article 15, for disorderly conduct. On 1 May 86, you received punishment
under Article 15, for disorderly conduct. On 15 Oct 86, your suspension for
the 1 May 86 punishment was vacated, again for disorderly conduct, when you
received a letter of reprimand for larceny of government property. Copies of
the documents to be forwarded to the Separation authority in support of this
recommendation are attached, The Conmander exercising SPCM Jurisdiction or a
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 charctertzed.

If you are discharged you will be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air
Force.

3. You have the right to consult counsel. Military legal counsel has been

obtained to assist you. I made an appointment for you to consult ‘Sasiiillidil
| at bidg. 2 RAF Fairford on 10 Dec 86 at 0800 hours. You may consult

civilian counsel at your own expense.

4. You have the right to submit statements in your own behalf. Any state-

_ ments you want the separation authority to consider must reach me within 3
workdays, which is 18 Dec 86, unless you request and receive an extension for
good cause shown. I will send then to the separation authority.

5. If you fail to consult counsel or to submit statements in your own behalf,
your failure will constitute a waiver of your right to do so.

6. Your are scheduled for a medical examination on 1 Aug 86 at O800 hours.
Report to the Flight Surgeon's office, RAF Fairford Clinic at that date and
time for your appointment.

7. Any personal information you furnish in rebuttal is covered by the Privacy
Act Statement as explained in AFR 39-10, attachment 6. A copy of AFR 39-10 is
available for your use in the orderly room.

fight People. Right Mission, Right Now.
ee FB eO- AD) BEG

Rw. Execute the attached acknowledgment and return it to me immediately.

  

2 Atch

1. Supporting Documents

2. Airman's Receipt of
Notification