. AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN a
ee AMN | dasa
TYPE
GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW
COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ~ ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL “—
YES NO
xX
VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBERS SITTING HON GEN UOTHC OTHER DENY
X
| :
X
: | [ x
ISSUES JNDEX NUMBER EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
A92.21, A93.01, A93.07, A67.10 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A94,05, A94.11 2 [APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
15 MAY 03 FD00-00263 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 Andrews AFB, MD

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and his right to appeal to the Board for Correction of Military Records.

 

 

 

 

SIGNAMURE DF RACOUDER nee a. Li aioe Tt ren oo scion LU SIGNAT)RE.OF BOARD PRESIDENT _

 

 

 

INDORSEMENT DATE: 29 MAY 03

 

SAF/MIBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD

RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3"? FLOOR

ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | gp2992.0221

GENERAL: The applicant appcals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable

The applicant’s case was considered by the Discharge Review Board (DRB), at Andrews AFB MD, on May
15, 2003. The applicant did not appear.

The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.
FINDINGS: The DRB denies the requested relief.

The DRB finds that the evidence of record and that provided by the applicant does not substantiate an
incquity or an impropriety that would justify an upgrade of the discharge.

ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with General service characterization from the Air Force for minor
disciplinary infractions. He has two letters of reprimand for unauthorized absence and for failure to obey
orders. He has nine records of individual counseling: four for failing to maintain safety standards, two for
failure to go, two for unsatisfactory duty performance, and one for unsatisfactory personal appearance.
Finally, the applicant has one Article 15 for leaving his place of duty without authorization. He raises three
issues in his application. He indicates first that personal problems (marital trouble) and youth contributed
to his misconduct. Second, that his punishments and disciplinary actions were exaggerated by a
commander and superintendent who wanted to make an example of him. Finally, he argues that his post-
service accomplishments paint a better picture of the ability, dedication, and patriotism that really defines
him as a person—today and when he was in the Air Force.

CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board (DRB) concluded that none of the issues have merit. It
may be that his personal problems and immaturity contributed to his misconduct, but the record indicates he
was given an extraordinary number of chances to overcome those problems. Moreover, thousands of young
airmen have similar difficulties and never engage in even a fraction of the applicant’s misbehavior. The
number of opportunities the applicant was given to comply with standards also cuts against the argument he
was made an example of. According to the record, the command took repeated disciplinary action against
him only because he repeatedly engaged in misconduct. Based on the descriptions of the various instances
of misconduct in the record, the disciplinary action taken was appropriate and in some cases, forgiving. As
for his post-service conduct, his accomplishments are laudable and his effort to make a life for himself and
family despite his discharge is commendable. However, this by itself is not enough to undo the earlier
action. Upgrading the discharge characterization based on nothing more than post-service conduct would
be viewed as clemency or a pardon, authority the DRB is not permitted to exercise. In short, without an
inequity or impropriety, the DRB cannot upgrade the characterization.

Having found no inequity or impropriety, the DRB declines to upgrade the discharge or change any other
aspect of the applicant’s record. The requested relief is denied.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
ry

FDO0-00263

h. Awards 6 Decs: AFPTR, NDSM.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (1) Yrs (11) Mos (28) Das
TAMS: (1) Yrs (10) Mos (5) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 00/06/26.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

Issue 1: I am writing this letter and sending in this form 293 with high
hopes and just cause for the discharge status of my exit being upgraded from
General- Under Honorable Conditions to Honorable. I fee) I deserve the status

change due to many factors.

First, at the time of my discharge, Operation Desert Shield/Storm was in
progress. At Travis AFB, where I was stationed, work shifts were 12 hours per
day, 7 days a week for almost 4 months. Also, I had been married, had a baby,
and was dealing with my wife having an affair during all of this. I am not and
never have blamed circumstances for my actions, but I do believe I was dealing
with more stress and distress than normal. t had a long string of disciplinary
problems, and at 19 1 do not think I realized the severe nature of my attitude.

I sure do now.

Next, due to the first encounter with my Chief Mater (sic) Sergeant and
Lieutenant in Command, I believe I was singled out to be made an example of.

Two other airmen in my flight had set me up for things I did not do. I was dorm
chief in Basic Training and these two were “under” my authority. Actions not
brought on by me set me in a very bad light to my‘superiors, forcing the
normally average events caused by me into string of minor infractions that

eventually became my discharge.

Also, I believe that a soldier or person with the intangibles like ‘heart’,
‘dedication’ and 'patriotism' are worth as much as an individual who cares of
nothing but himself, yet portrays the image everyone thinks is cool and want to
see from him.

I had then and have now heart enough to care about the people I was assigned
with and about the most important job I was doing.

I was then and am now dedicated to the professionals I lead and was lead by, and
to the country I swore to serve.

And I am now, but was’. then, Patriotic. . . about the whole reason I committed
myself to The United States Air Force, our country and its people.

Last, I would like to point out that although these words are true and honest
and heart-felt, the proof almost ten years later in my life should be what I've
become. Wouldn't it be true that if I had become successful in my professional
life that it would prove I wasn't really the type of person who deserved a
General Discharge? Wouldn't the decision to upgrade my discharge be answered by
time? And how I've proven myself to you over time? iI have a very successful
marriage with 2 beautiful, respectful, smart boys, one 8 and one 9. I ama
Commercial, Airline Transport Pilot, well respected in the aviation industry. I
FD00-00263

have been a F.A.A. government Aviation Instructor and Examiner. I've flown jets
all over the world and here in the US as well. J have started my own business
and it is growing much better than expected. I have enjoyed success well beyond

my years of only 29, and I think this, along with my postive attitude and love
for my country make for only one right decision. I hope you can see I am
nothing if not Honorable.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing form (sic)
you very soon.

ATCH

1. Temporary Airman Certificate.

2. Six Training Certificates.

3. Two Letters of Appreciation.

4. Flight Officer Employment Recommendation.
5. Seven Letters of Recommendation.

6. Individual Experience Record.

7. Airman Computer Test Report.
8. Driving Record.
9. Identification documents.

00/07/19/ia
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATR FORCE
WEADQUARTERS 60TH AIRLIFT WING (AMC)

ceeeceeeeees 9 DEC i992

 

1. Initiation of Action:

This action was initiated by the Section Commander, 60th Equipment
Maintenance Squadron on 1 Dec 92, pursuant to APR 39-10, Section H, paragraph
5-46, for misconduct (minor disciplinary infractions). The initiating Section
Cammander recommends a general discharge and does not recommend probation and
rehabilitation (P&R).

2. Respondent’s Personal Data:

A detailed summary of the respondent’s personal data is contained in
paragraph two of the Commander’s Recommendation for Discharge letter.

3. Basis for Discharge:

a. On or about 9 Nov 92, the respondent failed to go to his appointed
place of duty, for which he received an Article 15 dated 30 Nov 92, with
punishment of a reduction to the grade of airman, and seven days extra duty.

b. On or about 4 ‘Nov 92, after the respondent was placed on quarters for
48 hours, he failed to obey the DGMC medical practitioner’s written order when
he left his quarters to do personal errands, as evidenced by a DGMC Form 263.
For this misconduct, the respondent received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated
6 Nov 92, which documents were placed in an Unfavorable Information File (UIP).

c. Qn or about 8 Oct 92, the respondent failed to perform his assigned
duties properly, resulting in a Record of Individual Counseling (RIC) on
9 Oct 92,

d. Mor about 7 Oct 92, the respondent failed to mintain safety standards
by not. securing his respirator when he went to lunch, resulting in an RIC on
9 Oct 92.

e. On or about 30 Sep 92, the respondent failed to maintain safety
standards after he was verbally counseled previously, resulting in an RIC on
the same date.

£. Between on or about 30 Jul 92 and 4 Ang 92, the respondent failed to
maintain safety standards by reporting to work without his safety equipment,
resulting in an RIC on 7 Ang 92.
g-. Betwen on or about 30 Jul 92 and 3 Ang 92, the respondent failed to
comply with AFR 35-10 by not getting a haircut after he was told to do so,
resulting in an RIC on 4 Ang 92.

h. On or about 6 Jul 92, after the respondent was verbally counseled on
several occasions in the last 30 days, he again failed to maintain safety
standards by not wearing his safety equipment, resulting in an RIC on the same
date.

i. On or about 7 Mar 92, the respondent was late reporting for duty,
resulting in an RIC on the same date.

j- On or about 17 Jan 92, the respondent failed to perform his assigned
duties properly, resulting in an RIC on the same date.

k. Between on or about 6 Jan 92 and 9 Jan 92, the respondent failed to
report to his appointed place of duty, resulting in an RIC on 10 Jan 92.

4, I t's Statement:

a. The respondent was infommed of his right to submit statements in
response to this action. He submitted a written statement in response to
the Notification Letter. Previously, the respondent submitted an undated
written endorsement in response to the Referral EPR dated 7 Oct 92, wherein he
strongly felt he deserved an overall "3", instead of "2". His basis was
during the time he received a higher rating based on the huge improvements in
his job performance and the efforts he exerted to increase the quality and
quantity of his work. He strongly disagreed with his rater’s evaluation that he
was an "inefficient and ineffective performer." The respondent felt he did not
receive the proper training and the constant supervision a 3 level trainee
should have. He also stated he completed his task timely, accurately and had
displayed a self-confident attitude. He also considered himself to be a
skilled organizer, a commmicator and a satisfactory performer.

b. In his undated written statement, the respondent stated some of the
misconduct listed in the Notification Letter were not completely true or were
missing important information. If separated from the military, the respondent
asks that his service be characterized as honorable instead of a general
discharge so he will not lose same important benefits.

5. Ecrors or Irregularities: None.
&. Discussion:
a. This action is legally sufficient. The evidence in the case file

supports the respondent’s separation from the Air Force for misconduct (minor
disciplinary infractions) under AFR 39-10, Section H, paragraph 5-46.

b. A general discharge in this case is appropriate. Such a discharge
should not be characterized as honorable unless the respondent’s record is so
meritorious that any other characterization would be inappropriate. The
respondent's record does not meet this standard. Since his enlistment on
2 Apr 91, this nineteen year old respondent received an Article 15, 2 LORs/UIFs,
a Control Roster Action and several written counselings. The misconduct
involves failure to obey on two separate occasions, several incidents of failure
to perform his assigned duties properly specifically on safety standards,
tardiness, failure to comply with AFR 35-10, and a failure to go. His only
EPR for this enlistment is a referral, with an overall rating of "2". Given
the nature of the respondent’s misconduct, his age and brief length of
service, it is not likely that a board of officers would recommend a UOTHC
discharge. Accordingly, I concur with the Cammander’s recommendation for a

general discharge as characterization for this enlistment.

c. A program of probation and rehabilitation is not appropriate. Despite
attempts to improve the respondent’s behavior through a nonjudicial punishment,
written reprimands, a Control Roster Action, a Referral EPR and several written
counselings, he has not conformed his behavior to Air Force standards. These
xehabilitative efforts have failed to produce any positive change in the
respondent’s behavior. Further efforts are unlikely to produce any positive
change. Retention of the respondent, even in a probationary status, would be
contrary to the maintenance of good order and discipline at Travis Air Force

Base.
7. Barment:

There is nothing in the respondent's case file that would warrant banment.
Should you desire to bar the respondent, please contact. this office so the

appropriate letter may be prepared.

8. Your Options Are:
a. Retain the respondent;

b. Discharge the respondent with a general discharge with or without a
recamendation for P&R;

c. Forward the case to 22 AF/CC with a recommendation for an honorable
discharge with or without a recommendation for P&R; or

d. If you believe an Under Other than Honorable Conditions Discharge is
appropriate, direct reinitiation for processing according to AFR 39-10,
Chapter 6, Section C (Board Hearing or Board Waiver).

9. Recommendation:

Discharge the respondent with a general discharge without Par.

2 Atch

1. Proposed Letter
2. Case File (Am Fletcher)
HEADQUARTERS 60TH AIRLIFT? WING (AMC)

FROM: 60 EMS/CCOQ

SUBJ: Notification Letter

TO: Sai PCa

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

2. My reasons for this action are:

a. On or about 9 Nov 92, you did, at Travis Air Force Base, CA, fail to
go to your appointed place of duty, for which you received an Article 15 dated
30 Nov 92, with punishment of a reduction to the grade of aimman, and seven
days extra duty.

b. On or about 4 Nov 92, after being placed on quarters for 48 hours by a
DGMC medical practitioner, you failed to obey his written order by leaving
your quarters to do personal errands, as evidenced by a DGMC Form 263. For this

Misconduct, you received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 6 Nov 92 which

documents were placed in your existing Unfavorable Infonmation File (UIF).

c. On or about 8 Oct 92 you failed to perform assigned duties properly,
resulting in an Individual Record of Counseling (RIC) on 9 Oct 92.

d. On or about 7 Oct 92 you failed to maintain safety standards by not
securing your respirator when you left for lunch, resulting in an RIC qm
9 Oct 92,

e. On or about 30 Sep 92 you failed to mintain safety standards after
you were verbally counseled previously, resulting in an RIC on the same date.

f. Between on or about 30 Jul 92 and 4 Ang 92 you failed to maintain

safety standards by reporting to work without your safety equipments,
resulting in an RIC on 7 Aug 92.

g- .Between on or about 30 Jul 92 and 3 Aug 92 you failed to comply with
AFR 35-10 by not getting a haircut after being told to do so, resulting in an
RIC on 4 Aug 92.

h. On or about 6 Jul 92, after you were verbally counseled on several
occasions in the last 30 days, you again failed to mintain safety standards
by not wearing your safety equipments, resulting in an RIC on the same date.

i. On or about 7 Mar 92 you were late reporting for duty, resulting in an
RIC on the same date.
Article 15, 30 Nov 92
LOR/UIF, 6 Nov 92

RIC, 9 Oct 92

RIC, 9 Oct 92

RIC, 30 Sep 92

RIC, 7 Aug 92

RIC, 4 Aug 92

RIC, 6 Jul 92

RIC, 7 Mar 92

RIC, 17 Jan 92

RIC, 10 Jan 92.
LOR/UIF, 22 Oct 91
Other Derogatory Data

a. Referral EPR, 7 Oct 92
b. MSgt AP Stnt, 20 Jul 92

Cc. Sgt SRAM Stat. 20 Jul 92

d. Official Reprimand, 16 Sep 91

°

Prue Samo Ro oe
FD-00-00263

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

—<—< “mee

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 92/12/11 UP AFR 39-10,
para 5-46 (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions). Appeals for Honorable
Disch. ,

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 71/01/13. Enlmt Age: 19 11/12. Disch Age: 21 10/12. Educ:HS DIPL.
APOT: N/A. A-83, E-62, G-74, M-67. PAFSC: 45832 - Apprentice Aircraft
Structural Maintenance Specialiat. DAS: 91/08/07. ,

b. Prior Sv: AFRes 90/12/14 - 91/02/06 (1 month 23 days) (Inactive).

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Enld as AB 91/02/07 for 4 yrs. Svd: 1 Yrs 10 Mo 5 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AMN - 92/11/30 (Article 15, 92/11/30)
Alc - 92/06/07
AMN - 91/08/07

c. Time Lost: none.

d. Art 15’s; (1) 92/11/30, Travis AFB, CA - Article 86. You, did, o/a
09 Nov 92, w/o auth, go from your appointed place of
duty. Rdn to Amn, and 7 days extra duty.

(No appeal) (No mitigation)

 

e. Additional: LOR, 06 NOV 92 - Failure to obey orders.
RIC, 09 OCT 92 - Unsatisfactory duty performance..
RIC, 09 OCT 92 - Failure to maintain safety standards.
RIC, 30 SEP 92 - Failure to maintain safety standards.
RIC, 07 AUG 92 - Failure to maintain safety standards.
RIC, 04 AUG 92 - Unsatisfactory personal appearance.
RIC, 06 JUL 92 - Failure to maintain safety standards.
RIC, 07 MAR 92 - Late for duty.
RIC, 17 JAN 92 - Unsatisfactory performance.
RIC, 10 JAN 92 - Failure to go.
LOR, 22 OCT 91 ~- Unauthorized absence.

f. CM: none.

g.- Record of SV: 91/02/07 92/10/06 Travis AFB 2 (Initial) REF
(Discharged from Travis AFB)
j- On or about 17 Jan 92 you failed to perform assigned duties properly,
resulting in an RIC on the same date.

k. - Between on or about 6 Jan 92 and 9 Jan 92 you failed to report to your
appointed place of duty, resulting in an RIC on 10 Jan 92.

1. On or about 11 Oct 91 you departed your work station early, without
proper authority, for which you received an LOR dated 22 Oct 91. Due to your
history of departing work early, tardiness and other damestic problems, a UIF
was established, and you were placed on the control roster.

3. Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority in
support of this recommendation are attached. The Commander exercising SPCM
jurisdiction or higher authority wili decide whether you will be discharged,
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.

4. You have the right to consult counsel. Military legal counsel has been
obtained to assist you. I have made an appointment for you to consult the

Area Defense Counsel, Capt! i; Bldg 163, ext. 4-4569, on § Dec gr-_,
at 0720 hours. You may consult civilian counsel at your Own expense.

5. You have the right to submit statements in your own behalf. Any
statements you want the s tion authority to consider must reach me by NLT

_ BBM Bde 19, at /O2 hours unless you request and receive an
extension for good cause shown. I will send them to the separation authority.

6. 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.

7. Medical records indicate your medical examination at David Grant Medical
Center was accomplished on 25 Nov 92.

8. Any personal information you furnish in rebuttal is covered by the Privacy

Act Statement as explained in AFR 39-10, attachment 2. A copy of AFR 39-10 is
available for your use in the orderly room.

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

  

2 Atchs

1. Supporting Documents for the
Reasons for Discharge
(See attached listing)