Le
i|* . AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD
NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
Te AIC
TYPE
UVOTHC PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW _|
COUNSEL NAME. OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL
YES “NO
P x
” . VOTE OF THE BOARD
MEMBERS SITTING TION GEN VOTHC OTHER DENY
xX
xX
—r — a ——mterre samen]
X
Xx
xX
ISSUES INDEX NUMBER ” EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD
A01.13, A01.43, A92.21, A67,30 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
A94.05 2 [APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
| EARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
6 FEB 03 FD2002-0221 “"T COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
APPLIC ANT’S ISSUE AND THE BOARD’S DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE. |
REMARKS ™
Case heard at Travis AFB, CA
Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.
SIGNATURE OF BOARD PRESIDENT
INDORSEMENT
DATE: 6 FEB 03
TO: FROM:
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 will be used.
CASE NUMBER
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | pp902-0221
GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable
The applicant’s case was considered by the Discharge Review Board (DRB), at Travis AFB, CA on
February 6, 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 grants the requested relief.
The DRB finds that the evidence of record and that provided by the applicant substantiates an inequity and
an impropriety that would justify an upgrade of the discharge.
ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) service
characterization from the Air Force Reserve for commission of a serious offense (theft of government
property) and for unsatisfactory duty performance. He had a letter of reprimand for insubordination, poor
attitude, and irresponsibility, and an Article 15 for theft of government property in the amount of $40. The
member failed to respond to the notification of the discharge, which indicated a UOTHC characterization
was the worst he could receive. The notification, however, failed to inform the applicant that he had a right
to an administrative discharge board hearing. Having failed to respond, he waived his right to a discharge
board hearing and to submit matters for consideration. The applicant now contends he did not steal any
government property, but rather was taking it home in his privately owned vehicle in order to complete his
military tasks, a practice he claims was necessary and sanctioned. This explanation was consistent with the
applicant’s reply to the 1988 Article 15 action.
CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board (DRB) concludes that the discharge was not consistent
with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was an abuse of discretion
of the discharge authority. As a procedural matter, the failure to inform the applicant he was entitled to an
administrative discharge board hearing was a fatal error. The discharge regulation specifically requires
notification of that right. Failure to provide notification of the critical right cannot be ignored. In addition,
the DRB was not convinced that the misconduct, while harmful, could properly be characterized as a
serious offense. In that regard, the DRB determined that a discharge for commission of a serious offense
was inappropriate and could not be sustained. As a substantive matter, the DRB found that the applicant’s
misconduct was insufficient to support a UOTHC characterization under any circumstances. That he failed
to respond to the notification does not justify using a non-descriptive service characterization.
As a result, the applicant’s characterization should be changed to honorable under the provisions of 10 USC
1553.
Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
FD2002-0221
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD
——ir (Former A1lC) (HGH SGT)
,
1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a UOTHC Disch fr USAF 89/04/18 UP AFR 35-41,
para 5-50a, 5-50b, & 5-50c (Unsatisfactory Performance, & A Pattern of Misconduct
- Commission of a Serious Offense. Appeals for Honorable Disch.
2. BACKGROUND:
a. DOB: 56/02/22. Enlmt Age: 24 5/12. Disch Age: 33 1/12. Educ: HS DIPL.
AFOT: N/A. A-60, E-65, G-80, M-55. PAFSC: 55255 - Civil Engineering
Apprentice. DAS: 85/07/22.
b. Prior Sv: Enld AFRES 80/08/08 as A1C for 6 yrs. Svd: 6 yrs 1 month 8
days, of which AMS is 5 Mos 2 Days. SRA - 80/11/16. SGT - 84/01/20.
3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Reenld AFRes as SGT 86/09/17 for 6 yrs. Svd: 2 Yrs 7 Mo 1 Das, of which
AMS is 1 month 21 days. .
b. Grade Status: A1C - 88/02/07 (Article 15, 88/02/07)
SRA - 88/03/22 (Vacation of NCO Status, 88/03/22)
c. Time Lost: None.
d. Art 15's: (1) 88/02/07, McClellan AFB, CA, Atricle 121. You did, on
or about 10 Jan 88, steal military property, of a value
of about $40.00, the property of the United States
Government. Reduction in grade to AlC. (Appeal denied)
(No mitigation)
e. Additional: LOR, 17 NOV 88 - Insubordination, irresponsibility, and
poor attitude.
f. CM: None.
g. Record of SV: None.
(Discharged from McClellan AFB)
h. Awards & Decs: Unknown.
i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (8) Yrs (8) Mos (11) Das
TAMS: (0) Yrs (6) Mos (23) Das
4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/05/20.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0035
X PERSONAL APPEARANCE ) NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL —-t ISSUES INDEX NUMBER A94.05, A92.15, A92.19, A67,90 1 A01.43 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE ~~~) CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 02-10-03 FD2002-0035 —P COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ‘ee | ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING —— REMARKS + Change...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD01-00145
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD “YES NO x NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN ~ —- erage SSGT | (ae. CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | ¢p.01-00145 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of her discharge to general. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: a. Reenld as SSGT 86/12/08 for 6 yrs.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0229
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0229 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. 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. The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0269
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2002-0269 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0269 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former AI1C) (HGH SRA) 1. You, did, on or about 23 Jan 02, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0252
ISSUES A94.01 AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN AMN TYPE PERSONAL APPEARANCE COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION YES NO MEMBERS SITTING X RECORD REVIEW ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL INDEX NUMBER A67.10 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE 19 DEC 02 CASE NUMBER FD2002-0252 1 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 3 4 BRIEF OF PERSONNEL...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0107
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD02-0107 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The board finds that neither evidence of record nor that provided by the applicant provides a sufficient basis in clemency for a change of discharge. month for six months, and reduction to AB.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0131
The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. 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. b. Grade Status: AB - 92/02/18 (Article 15, 92/02/18) AMN - 92/01/17 c. Time Lost: none.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-00525
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN 2LT | nme. CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | ¢p9002-00525 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to General (under honorable conditions). If he can provide additional documented information to substantiate an issue, the applicant should consider exercising his right to make a personal appearance before the Board.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0075
CASI NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE =| pp3n92.9975 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. ATCH None FD2002-0075 02/07/30/er * ATR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW ROARD HEARING RECORD tne ee ome: NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) — GRADE, AVSN/SSAN Wn AMN | Sanat EE St -. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0182 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD amgeniinn.
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0448
CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD2002-0448 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. The applicant received three Article 15s, two Letters of Reprimand, one Letter of Counseling, one Letter of Admonishment, and two Records of Individual Counseling for financial irresponsibility, failure to obey, failure to go, and traffic, parking and speeding violations. Attachment: Examiner's Brief FD2002-0448 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR...