AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

 

 

 

« OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
a AMN
TYPE P
GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS ANP OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

 

 

 

MEMBERS SITTING

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Er.

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

ISSUES INDEX NUMBER Tl oo ERMIBITS SUBMITTED TOLLE BO?
A93.09, A92.35 A67.90 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2. | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
oe —
B LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
| HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
02-12-18 FD2002-0282

 

COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

[~ ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
at PERSONAL APPEARANCE

 

|

 

 

 

 

 

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL aPPERANCE HEARING

 

APPOCANTS ISSUE. AND. HE BOARD:

nay ee

   

aa hia

Ss P's DECINEN AN RATIONAL? Be PecussED | on ear

    

oe BODES

 

REMARKS

Case heard at Washington, D.C,

submit an application to the AFBCMR.

 

 

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to

 

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

 

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 | gp 3992-0282
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 misconduct, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline. He had
a Letter of Admonishment, three Letters of Reprimand (LOR), an Article 15, and vacation of suspended
punishment. There were also two Memos for Record documenting misconduct. His misconduct included
at least nine documented instances of failure to go to his appointed place of duty over a 9-month period of
time. On some occasions member was as much as an hour late, and documents reflect he was late on
average once per month. At the time of the discharge, applicant waived his right to consult counsel and to
submit statements on his own behalf. Applicant now cites his desire to receive his G.I. Bill education
benefits, and notes he never got into serious trouble. He also states he had applied for a hardship discharge
that was denied, and that he requested to be discharged due to personal problems. The Board found nothing
in the record to substantiate these claims. The Board noted that in some of his replies to disciplinary action,
member agreed he had no excuse for his behavior and stated it would not happen again. He was not
however motivated enough to conform to standards and his misconduct continued. The Board also noted
member was diagnosed an alcohol abuser, entered into an in-patient detoxification program, and an
intensive outpatient alcohol and drug abuse training program. Furthermore, he had been reclassified from
the electronic warfare career field to financial management because he “didn’t want to be there” and it “was
hard on (him).” While understandable that members experiencing personal problems may have additional
stress, applicant submitted no documentary evidence of those problems, how they were unique, or that he
sought help from available agencies such as the Chaplain, Family Support Center, chain of command, or the
Mental Health clinic. The Board further noted that when his misconduct occurred member was the same
age as other airmen who had adhered to the standards. He was counseled 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, so he was held accountable for his actions. No inequity or impropriety was found in
this discharge in the course of the records review.

Applicant cited his desire to receive his G.I. Bill education benefits as justification for an upgrade. While
the Board was sympathetic to the impact of the loss of these benefits on applicant, this is not a matter of
equity or propriety that warrants an upgrade.

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
FD2002-0282
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

Se (Former AMN) (HGH A1C)

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 00/09/28 UP AFI 36-3208,
para 5.50.2 (Pattern of Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and
Discipline). Appeals for Honorable Discharge.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 75/02/15. Enlmt Age: 22 8/12. Disch Age: 25 7/12. Educ: HS DIPL.
AFQOT: N/A. A-76, 5-68, G-64, M-78. PAFSC: 6F031 - Financial Management and
Comptroller Apprentice. DAS: 99/03/18.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 97/10/24 - 98/03/24 (5 months 1 day) (Inactive) .
3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Enlisted as AB 98/03/25 for 6 yrs. Svd: 02 Yrs 06 Mo 04 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AMN - 00/08/01 (Article 15, Vacation, 00/08/08)
Alc - 98/05/09

c. Time Lost: None.

d. Art 15’s: (1) 00/08/08, Vacation, Little Rock AFB, AR - Article 86.
You did, on or about 3 Aug 00, without authority, fail
to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of
duty. Reduction to Amn. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

(2) 00/08/01, Little Rock AFB, AR - Article 86. You, did,
on or about 6 Jul 00, without authority, fail to go at
the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty.
Suspended reduction to Amn, forfeiture of $50.00 pay
per month for 2 months, and a reprimand. (No appeal)
(No mitigation)

e. Additional: MFR, 07 JUL 0O - Late for work.
MFR, O7 JUL 00 - Late for work.
LOR, 05 JUN 00 - Late for work.
LOR, 03 APR 0O - Late for work.
LOR, 21 MAR 00 - Late for work.
LOA, 14 FEB 00 - Late for work.

£. CM: None.

g. Record of SV: 98/05/25 - 99/11/24 Little Rock AFB 3 (Initial)

(Discharged from Little Rock AFB)
FD2002-0282

h. Awards & Decs: AFTR, AFOUA.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (02) Yrs (11) Mos (05) Das
TAMS: (02) Yrs (06) Mos (04): Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/06/25.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

Issue 1: I ---~--- requested to be discharged from the US Air Force due to
family separation and my children being so far away from Little Rock AFB where I
was stationed at the time. I had applied for a hardship, but did not qualify.

My new commander at 314°? CPTS helped me obtain a discharge resulting in a
General/Under Honorable Condition, I was a hard worker & never got into serious

trouble while in the Air Force. I am requesting that my discharge be upgraded
to an Honorable, so that I may be able to receive my GI Bill to help me through
school and find a good job to support myself and children.

I am now starting school on July 8, 2002 for an Associates Degree in Information

Technology. Please strongly consider this application for my upgrade as my
future depends on this. Thanks in advance.

ATCH
None.

02/10/09/ia
i” FR LZ002 - DAEL
-“SEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS 314TH AIRLIFT WING (AETC)
LITTLE ROCK AIR FORCE BASE, ARKANSAS

 

2.0 SEP 2000
MEMORANDUM FOR 314 AW/CC

FROM: 314 AW/JA

SUBJECT: Legal Review of Administrative Discharge: ASQ RQ§RRgen

MAP, 314" Comptroller Squadron

1. LEGAL SUFFICIENCY: I have reviewed the attached case file of Qqueaaialiiiivwrgggy, and
pending proper medical clearance pursuant to AFI 36-3208, para 6.3, find it legally sufficient to
support separating gaia for a Pattern of Misconduct (Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order
and Discipline) with an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge without probation and
rehabilitation.

2. PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS: On 18 August 2000, SQqggMM 3 14 CPTS/CC,
initiated action under AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208 to involuntarily separate for a
Pattern of Misconduct (Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline). diewn::
properly notified of his rights associated with a notification discharge IAW AFPD 36-32 and AFI

36-3208. (Tabs | and 2.) sgaliggaaie waived his right to consulted with legal counsel and

waived his right to submit matters on his behalf. (Tab 3.) i ecommends
separation of Gigeailiiganat sith an Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge without P&R.

Al eligible for P&R according to AFI 36-3208, Chapter 7. As the Special Court-
“Martial Convening Authority for the installation, you are the discharge authority for the case.

AFI 36-3208, para 5.56.1.1; Special Order G-012, dated 23 September 1998, HQ USAF.

3. PERSONAL DATA: Shay ' 25 years old. He enlisted on 25 March 1998 for a term of
6 years and was assigned to 314 CPTS on 18 March 1999. He is entitled to wear the Air Force

Training Ribbon. Member received one Enlisted Performance Report with the following
closeout date and rating: 24 November 1999 — 3. (Tab 5)

4. BASIS FOR ACTION: The basis for action in the case is AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208,
para 5.50.2, and involves the following pattern of misconduct.

a. On or about 3 August 2000, SURGE was derelict in the performance of his duties, in
that without authority, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit:
building 1255.. For his actions, he received a Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment
Under Article 15, UCMJ. (Atch 1-1)

Golden Legacy, Boundless Future...Your Nation's Air Force
Pp2en2-dA 82.

b. On 6 July 2000, Spangaaye was derelict in the performance of his duties, in that without
authority, he failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: building
1255. For his actions, he received Nonjudicial Punishment Under Article 15, UCMIJ. (Atch 1-2)

c. On three occasions 21 March 2000, 3 April 2000, and 27 April 2000, $900RBA@F was
derelict in the performance of his duties, in that without authority, fail to go at the time
prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: building 1255. For his actions, he received
three letters of reprimands. (Atch 1-3)

d. On 14 February 2000, aa was derelict in the performance of his duties, in that
without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit: building
1255. For his actions, he received a letter of admonishment. (Atch 1-4)

5. SUMMARY OF MATTERS SUBMITTED B Ye None. (Tab 3)

6. SHOULD gig BE DISCHARGED? Yes. Amn should be discharge@lAW
AFI 36-3208, Paragraph 5.50.2, for a Pattern of Misconduct. His misconduct includes conduct
of a nature that tends to disrupt order, discipline, and morale within the military community and
usually involves causing dissent, disruption, and degradation of mission effectiveness. Based on

Amn Perry’s history of misconduct, administrative separation is warranted.

7. CHARACTERIZATION: