AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

    
  
  

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
; AB
PE
GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

VOTE OF THE BOARD

MEMBERS SITTING HON GEN UOTH OTHER DENY

es Xx
6,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FY | x

s EXHIBITS SUBME TO THE BOARD
ER APPOINTING THE BOARD

 

 

 

 

    

ISSUES INDEX NUMBER

A93.01, A93.03, A94.53 A67.10

 

 

iS a
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

HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER

02-12-09 FD2002-0267

 

 

ml we) bh) mm)

 

 

 

    
 
  
 

 

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

 

 

 

 

 

 

REMARKS

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to
submit an application to the AFBCMR.

 

a
SIGNATURE OF R p SURE OF BOARD PRESIDENT

   

550 C STREET WE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3°” FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

SAF/MIBR (od, SECRETARY OF THE ATR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
ST, SUITE 40

 

 

 

 

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | ¢p9992-0267

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 applicant substantiates an inequity
or impropriety that would justify a change of discharge.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. He had three Records of Individual
Counseling, four Letters of Reprimand, and an Article 15. His misconduct included three instances of
failure to go, sleeping on duty, smoking in a government vehicle while transporting live munitions, and
failing to follow proper technical order procedures while working on munitions. At the time of the
discharge, member consulted counsel and waived his right to submit statements in his own behalf. Member
now infers the discharge was inappropriate because he was inexperienced and received insufficient
supervision. The board found this issue without merit. The Board noted member had eight incidents in a 9-
month period, thus clearly establishing a pattern of misconduct. The Board further noted that member was
the same age as other airmen who adhere to the standards when his misconduct occurred, and he knew right
from wrong. He was counseled repeatedly in an effort to help him correct his deficiencies and had many
opportunities to improve his behavior, He failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. He was
responsible for his own actions, and therefore was held accountable for them. No inequity or impropriety
was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

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
FD2002-0267
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(Former AB) (HGH A1C)

 

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 89/11/01 UP AFR 39-10,

para 5-46 (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions). Appeals for Honorable
Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 69/10/09. Enilmt Age: 17 9/12. Disch Age: 20 0/12. Educ: HS DIPL.
AFOT: N/A. A-40, E-65, G-57, M-73. PAFSC: 41131 — Apprentice Missile
Maintenance Specialist. DAS: 88/11/14.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 87/07/10 — 88/06/21 (11 months 12 days) (Inactive).

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Enlisted as AB 88/06/22 for 6 yrs. Svd: 01 Yr 04 Mos 10 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AB - 89/10/06 (Article 15, 89/10/06).
Alc - 88/08/05.

c. Time Lost: None.

d. Art 15’s: (1) 89/10/06, Ellsworth AFB, SD - Article 92. Preliminary '
investigation has disclosed that you, who knew of your |
duties, on or about 20 Sep 89, were derelict in the ‘
performance of those duties in that you negligently
failed to follow proper technical procedures as .
outlined in TO 00-5-1(1-8), as it was your duty to do.
Reduction to AB. (No appeal) (No mitigation)~

e. Additional: LOR, 06 OCT 89 - Sleeping on duty.
LOR, 24 AUG 89 - Failure to go.
RIC, 15 AUG 89 ~ Late CDCs.

RIC, 08 AUG 89 — Smoking in a government vehicle.
LOR, O07 AUG 89 - Failure to go.

LOR, 31 MAY 89 - Late to work.
RIC, 28 FEB 89 ~ Failure to attend scheduled training.

f£. CM: None.

g- Record of SV: None.

(Discharged from Ellsworth AFB)

h, Awards & Decs: AFTR.
FD2002-0267

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (02) Yrs (03) Mos (22) Das
TAMS: (01) Yr (04) Mos (10) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/06/19.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

Issue 1: My undesirable discharge was inequitable because I was given an
Article 15 for not upholding to my supervisory responsibilities. At the time
of Article 15 I was only a 3 level and and (sic) Airman 1* class. In the PFE

Manual it states that a 3 level and Airman 1% class have no supervisory
responsibilities.

Issue 2: My undesirable discharge was improper due to separations by AFR
39-10 pattern of minor disciplinary infractions. I feel”™that if my superiors
had realized this that I would not have been separated so hastily; Due to
Article 15.

Issue 3: At the time of incident my topside team chief Sgt ----- decided
he would ride on other truck. When we returned to Base he did not follow-up
on myself or Airman ----+-~-~ . This is a lack of supervisory responsibilities.

I was new to Airforce (sic) and totally regret my discharge. Yet Sgt ------
was not held accountable for nothing.

Issue 4: My family has given their lives to the Air Force. My father and
two brothers all who have made the Air Force their life. I felt that IT
showwed (sic) our good name by all that happened but I was young and no-one
had directed me in the rite (sic) path to defend myself. I love my country
and still love the Air Force for what she has done for my family.

ATCH
None.

02/09/26/ia
<5 ONTO
De PARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE ao "
HEADQUARTERS 12TH AIR DIVISION (SAC) F %
ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA 57706-5000 3 :
% Me
“ceo a
REPLY TO
ATTN. OF: JA 24 October 1989
suvect' Legal Review of AFR 39-10 Discharge: A: eopinanaeaiiiiietiige
ro: CC
1. J have re goved the attached AER 39-10 separation case file concerning

  

Ana 44 OMMS, and find it legally sufficient.

2. BACKGROUND: On 18 Oct 89, 44 OMMS/CC initiated this separation action
pursuant to AFR 39-10, paragraph 5-46, for misconduct. The commander
recommended a general discharge without probation and rehabilitation (P & R).
On the same date, obi: ceived and acknowledged notification of«this

action. On 19 Oct 89, the respondent waived his right to submit statements
after consulting with legal counsel.

3. SUMMARY OF THE EVIDENCE:

a. The reasons for the proposed discharge action include the following:
(1) on 20 Sep 89 (Apis ws derelict in the performance of his duties by
failing to follow Tech Order procedures; (2) on 22 Sep 89, he fell asleep while
transporting a Priority A resource and components; (3) on 16 Aug 89, he +
failed to go to his appointed place of duty; (4) on 8 Aug 89, he failed to turn
in his CDCs after being told to do so by his supervisor; (5) on 8 Aug 89, he was,
observed smoking in a GOV in violation of 44 SMW policy; (6) on 4 Aug 89, he
failed to go to the Wing Commander's Call after being told twice to do so; (7)
on 30 May 89, he was almost an hour late for work; and (8) on 28 Feb 89, he
failed to report back to his scheduled training class.

b. The respondent is 20 years old, and has one year and three months of”
active military service. His record contains no EPRs or APRs due to his brief
time in service. He has received one Article 15, five Letters of Reprimand, and
three Letters of Counseling for his acts of misconduct.

4, DISCUSSION:

a. In my opinion, the respondent's record of misconduct provides a

sufficient basis for discharge and indicates that he should be separated from
the service.

b. In considering the appropriate characterization of service, I note the
commander's recommendation, the Article 15, and the numerous adverse
administrative actions. Viewed in its totality, @QQQRRQMMMMs record during
this current term of service constitutes such a significant negative aspect as

to outweigh the positive features of his military record, thereby warranting a
general discharge.

Peace....i8 our Profession
cs The respondent's record of numerous deficiencies and his failure to
conform to standards after repeated efforts to rehabilitate him indicate that
he received preprocessing rehabilitation under paragraph 5-2, and furthermore,
that the respondent is not a suitable prospect for FP & R. Im addition, any
continued retention in a probationary status would be prejudicial to good order
and discipline.

5« OPTIONS: As the Special Court-Martial Convening Authority, you may:

ae Retain the respondent;

b. Recommend that respondent be separated with an honorable discharge,

with or without an offer of P & R, and forward the case to 8 AF/CC for final
action;

c. Direct the respondent be separated with a general discharge, with or
without an offer of P & R; or

d. Direct that the case be reinitiated and processed according to AFR

39-10, Chapter 6, Section C, if you believe that issuance of an under other than
honorable conditions discharge .may be warranted.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS: I recommend that you separate AB Sperling under AFR 39-10,
paragraph 5-46, with a general discharge, without an offer of P & R. I also

recommend that you direct 812 CSG/CC to issue a letter barring AB Sperling from
Ellsworth AFB.

 
 

1 Atch
Case File

 
  

Deputy Staff Jud

I concur.
rac eile

Staff Judge Advocate
cONSTITUT oy,

 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 3 “te,
HEADQUARTERS 44TH STRATEGIC MISSILE WING (SAC) £ %
ELLSWORTH AIR FORCE BASE, SOUTH DAKOTA 57706-5000 3 E
4 be
Ge
rear o OO

REPLY TO

ATTN. OF: AA OMMS /CC 18 October 1989

SUBJECT:

Notification Letter

TO: A p

  

1. I am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for
misconduct. The authority for this action is AFR 39-10, para 5-46. If my
recommendation is approved, your service will be characterized as honorable or
general. I am recommending that your service be characterized as general.

2. My reasons for this action are:

a» On or about 20 Sep 89, you were derelict in the performance of your
duties by neglingently failing to follow proper technical procedures.

b. On or about 22 Sep 89, you failed to remain awake while transporting a
Priority A resource and components.

ce On or about 16 Aug 89, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your
appointed place of duty, to wit: A SAC video session at Ellsworth AFB.

d. On or about 8 Aug 89, you failed to turn in your CDCs after being told
to do so by your supervisor. :

e» On or about 8 Aug 89, you were observed smoking in a GOV a violation of
the 44 SMW policy against smoking in GOVs.

fF. On or about 4 Aug 89 ou failed to go to the Wing Commander's call
after being told twice by IES do so.

ge On or about 30 May 89, you reported 55 minutes late for duty.

he On or about 28 Feb 89, you failed to report back to your scheduled
training class.

Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in
support of this recommendation are attached. The commander 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

characterized. 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 yous. I have made an appointment for you to consult Capt
at Bldg 2405 on 19 Oct 89 at 0815 hrs. You may consult civilian

counsel at your own expense.

Peace.... is our Profession
4. You have the right to submit statements in your own behalf. Any statement

you want the separation authority to consider mist reach me by 230¢7 #,
unless you request and receive an extension for good cause shown. I will send
them to the separation authority.

5. You were scheduled for a medical examination on 17 Oct 89 at 0815.

6. 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 in your orderly room.

7

   

Execute the attached acknowledgment and return it to me immediately.

3 Atchs

1. Doc Supporting Recommendation for
Discharge

2. Doc containing other Derogatory
Info

3. Amn's Receipt of Notification
Letter