‘ AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

 

 

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) GRADE AFSN/SSAN
AB cine
PERSONAL APPEARANCE X RECORD REVIEW _|
NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION . | ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

rel me] Pe) MI oe

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
  

 

 

ISSUES INDEX NUMBER a i
A92.01; A92.35 A67.90 1 ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
4 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION
HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE
10 JAN 03 FD2002-0355 COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING _ |

 

 

 
 

SIONAL RATION Seon TEA
Lo ee

 

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.

 

SIGWATYRE OF RECORDER, mir tts SIGNATURE OF BOARD PRESIDED

 

 

 

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 FD2002-0355

GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to General, change of reason for discharge,
and change of reenlistment eligibility (RE) code.

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) but declined to
exercise this right.

The attached brief contains the 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
inequity or impropriety, which would justify a change of discharge.

The applicant’s issues are listed in the attached brief.

Issue 1. Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because ‘it was too harsh”. The information
provided by the applicant and contained in his records was carefully reviewed by the DRB. The records
indicated the applicant received three Article 15’s for misconduct. The misconduct included dereliction of
duty, failure to go, making a false official statement and wrongfully using a Government Cellular Phone.
The DRB opined that through these administrative actions, the applicant had ample opportunities to change
his negative behavior. The Board concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct
expected of all military members. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was
found to be appropriate.

Issue 2. Applicant states that his discharge did not take into account the good things he did while in the
service. The DRB took note of the applicant's duty performance as documented by his performance reports,
and other information contained in the records. They found the seriousness of the willful misconduct offset
any positive aspects of the applicant's duty performance. The Board concluded the discharge was
appropriate for the reasons which were the basis for this case.

‘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, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
FD2002-0355
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(Former AB) (HGH SSGT)

 

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a UOTH Disch fr USAF 01 SEP 98 UP AFI 36-

3208, para 5.50.2 (Misconduct - Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and
Discipline). Appeals for General Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 31 May 66. Enlmt Age: 20 11/12. Disch Age: 32 3/12. Educ: HS DIPL.

AFQT: N/A. A-51, E-64, G-74, M-57. PAFSC: 3P051 - Security Forces Journeyman.
DAS: 19 Aug 97.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 17 May 87 - 25 May 87 (9 days) (Inactive).

(2) Enlisted as AB 26 May 87 for 4 yrs. Reenlisted as SRA 29
Oct 90 for 4 yrs. Reenlisted as Sqt 01 Sep 94 for 2 yrs. Extended 26 Jul 96 for
9 months. Svd: 9 yrs 3 months 2 days, all AMS. AMN-~(APR Indicates): 26 May 87-
25 May 88. A1C-(EPR Indicates): 26 May 88-25 May 89. SRA - 26 May 90. SGT-(EPR
Indicates): 12 Apr 91-2 Nov 91. APRs: 9. EPRs: 5,4,4,5,5,5,4,4,5,5.

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Reenlisted as Sgt 29 Aug 96 for 4 yrs. Extended 12 Jul 97 for 12
months. Svd: 2 Yrs 0 Mo 3 Das, of which AMS is 1 yr 11 months 24 days (excludes 9
days lost time).

b. Grade Status: AB - 10 Jul 98 {Article 15, 10 Jul 98)

SRA - 15 Apr 98 (Article 15, Vacation, 29 May 98)
SSGT - 1 Oct 96.

c. Time Lost: 18 May 98 thru 26 May 98 (9 days).

d. Art 15’s: (1) 10 Jul 98, McGuire AFB, NJ - Article 86. You did, on
or about 18 May 98, without authority, absent yourself
from your place of duty at which you are required to
be, to wit: Clifton Recruiting Office located at
Clifton, New Jersey, and did remain so absent until on
or about 26 May 98. Article 92. You, did, within the
territorial limits of the United States, on or about 18
May 98, fail to obey a lawful general regulation, to
wit: AFI 65-104, Financial Management, paragraph 25.1,
dated 01 May 96, by wrongfully using your ------- U.S.
Government travel charge card to withdraw cash from
automated teller machine for personal purposes
unrelated to official government travel. You did,
within the territorial limits of the United States, on
FD2002-0355

divers occasions between on or about 18 May 98 to on or
about 26 May 98, fail to obey a lawful general
regulation, to wit: DOD 5500.7-.R, Joint Ethics
Regulation, paragraph 2-301(a) dated Aug 93, by
wrongfully using your Government Cellular Phone for
personal purposes unrelated to official government
business. Reduction to AB. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

(2) 29 May 98, Vacation, McGuire AFB, NJ - Article 86.
You, did, on or about 18 May 98, without authority,
absent yourself from your place of duty at which you
are required to be, to wit: Clifton Recruiting Office
located at Clifton, New Jersey, and did remain so
absent until about 25 May 98. Reduction to SrA.

(No appeal) (No mitigation)

(3) 15 Apr 98, McGuire AFB, NJ - Article 86. You, did, on
or about 26 Mar 98, without authority, fail to go at
the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty.
Article 92. You, who knew of your duties, on or about
1 Dec 97 and on or about 24 Mar 98, were derelict in
the performance of those duties in that you negligently
failed to contact all Category 1 and II Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery leads telephonically, as it
was your duty to do. You, who knew of your duties,
between on or about 1 Feb 98 and 28 Feb 98, were
derelict in the performance of those duties in that you
negligently failed to visit all Priority 1 Schools
within your area of responsibility twice, as it was
your duty to do. Article 107. You, did, on or about
24 Mar 98, with intent to deceive, make an official
statement, to wit: that you had contacted the squadron
computer representative, ------ , or words to that
effect, which statement was totally false and was then
known by you to be so false. You, did, on or about 25
Mar 98, with intent to deceive, make an official
statement, to wit: that you had made phone calls to
Category 1 and II Armed Services Vocational Aptitude
Battery leads, or words to that effect, which statement
was totally false and was then known by you to be so
false. Suspended reduction to the grade of SRA,
forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for 2 months, and a
reprimand. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

e. Additional: None.

£. CM: None.

g. Record of SV: 13 Feb 96 - 12 Feb 97 McConnell AFB 5 = (Annual)
13 Feb 97 ~ 02 Jul 97 McConnell AFB 5 = (CRO)
FD2002-0355

(Discharged from McGuire AFB)

h. Awards & Decs: AFAM W/1 DEV, AFLSAR W/1 DEV, AFTR, NDSM, HSM, NCOPMER
W/1l DEV, AFOUA W/1 DEV, JMUA, AFGCM W/2 DEVS.

1. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (11) Yr (3) Mos (6) Das

TAMS: (11) Yr (2) Mos (28) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 14 Aug 02.
(Change Discharge to General)

Issue 1: My discharge was inequitable because it was based on an incident
which occurred between 18May98 and 26May98. Although my conduct did not reflect
that of a non-commissioned officer during this period, I feel that my 10 years
of honorable service prior to this incident was not taken into account. Because
of the type of discharge I received, I have not been able to pursue a career in
law enforcement even though I was well trained and excel in this field.

-ATCH

1. List of Employment and Non-Hires.
2. Character Reference. ,

25NOVO02/ia
FD 220.2-O3S>

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS TWENTY-FIRST AIR FORCE (AMC)

 

10 Aug 1998

MEMORANDUM FOR 21 AF/CC

FROM: HQ21 AF/JA
1907 East Arnold Ave.
McGuire AFB NJ 08641-5613

SUBJECT: AFI 36-3208 Discharge Action iq ee
Recruiting Squadron, McGuire AFB)

 

1. This case is presented to 21 AF/CC for action as separation authority pursuant to AFI 36-
3208, paragraph 5.56.2. On 30 Jul 98, the respondent's commander initiated administrative
discharge action against him under AF] 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2 (Pattern of Misconduct —
Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline). The commander recommended separation
from the Air Force with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (VOTHC) discharge and
without probation and rehabilitation (P&R). The respondent elected to consult counsel and-
submitted an unconditional waiver of a board hearing in a memorandum dated 4 Aug 98. The
special court-martial convening authority (the 305" Air Mobility Wing Commander) has
recommended the waiver be accepted and that the respondent be given a UOTHC discharge
without P&R.

2. As the separation authority, 21 AF/CC has the following options:
a. Retain the respondent in the Air Force; or

b. Reject the unconditional waiver and allow the processing of the case to continue
according to AFI 36-3208; or

c. Accept the unconditional waiver and order the respondent discharged with an honorable,
general, or Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) discharge, with or without P&R.

3. Facts:

 

a. Personal Data: The respondent is 32 years old. The respondent’s current enlistment
began on 29 Aug 96 for a term of four years. The respondent’s TAFMSD is 26 May 87.
FDROZ- 2385

b. For the Government: A preponderance of the evidence establishes the following events
and disciplinary actions occurred during respondent's current enlistment:

 

DATE INCIDENT _ ACTION

18 May - AWOL, Amex Abuse Art 15, dtd 10 Jul 98

26 May 98 Misuse of Gov’t Cell Phone Red. to AB

18 May - AWOL Vacated Art 15, dtd

25 May 98 29 May 98 — Red to E-4
26 Mar 98 Failure to go Art 15, dtd 15 Apr 98

Red to E-4 (susp), forfeit $150
per month for 2 months & a

reprimand
1 Dec 97 - Dereliction of Duty See Art 15 above
24 Mar 98
1 Feb 98 - Dereliction of Duty See Art 15 above
28 Feb 98
24 Mar 98 False Official Statement See Art 15 above
25 Mar 98 False Official Statement See Art 15 above

This information should be considered in deciding which of the options described in paragraph 2
should be exercised.

c. For the Respondent: The respondent submitted a statement with his waiver of the
administrative discharge board. He apologizes for his misconduct; states that he feels his overall
service has been good, except for his time in recruiting. The respondent asks that consideration
be given to separating him with a General Discharge, in light of his 11 years of good service and
the difficulty a UOTHC will have on him in seeking employment. The respondent has 13.
Enlisted Performance Reports on file with the following overall ratings: 9,5,4,4,5,5,5,4,4,5,5,5,
and 5. The respondent has received the Air Force Achievement Medal (2 OLCs), Joint
Meritorious Unit Award, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (1 OLC), Air Force Good Conduct
Medal (2 OLCs), National Defense Service Medal, Humanitarian Service Award, Air Force
Longevity Service Award (1 OLC), Air Force NCO PME Ribbon, and the Air Force Training
Ribbon.

3. Errors and Irregularities: This case has been processed in substantial compliance with AFI
36-3208. The respondent has been afforded all the rights and protections to which he is entitled.
The case file is legally sufficient to support discharge of the respondent for the basis
recommended by the initiating commander.
Po 2002-0355

4. Discussion: An Airman is a subject to discharge under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5. 50. 2 > for a

ee

evidenced by his prior ‘isoiplinary actions.

5. Under AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.48.1, discharge for conduct prejudicial to good order and
discipline is usually characterized by a UOTHC discharge. A review of the misconduct in this
case does not support the respondent’s request that a general discharge be granted. His conduct
was self-serving, repeated, and he did not correct his behavior despite repeated attempts to
counsel him. After careful consideration of the respondent’s military record and conduct during
the current enlistment, I believe a UOTHC discharge 1s the proper service characterization. P&R

is not warranted.

6. Recommendation: That 21 AF/CC accept the respondent's unconditional waiver and order
him discharged for conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, under AFI 36-3208,
paragraph 5.50.2, with a UOTHC discharge and without P&R. We have attached a letter for 21

AF/CC’s signature which implements these recommendations.

VE

     

TAtatt J udge Advocate #
Attachments:

1. Proposed Letter
2. Case File
FVDA2602- 0635S
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
305th Air Mobility. Wing (AMC)

 

MEMORANDUM FOR 305 AMW/CC
FROM: 305 AMW/JA
SUBJECT: Legal Review - Request for Unconditional Waiver of

Administrative Discharge Board, @R -
_ y} McGuire AFB, NJ

 

  

1. This case is presented to 305 AMW/CC for action as convening
authority pursuant to AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of

Airmen, 95.56. On 30 Jul 98, the respondent's commander, 305
RCS/CC, initiated administrative discharge action against the
respondent under AFI 36-3208, 5.50.2, Pattern of Misconduct -
Conduct Prejudicial to the Good Order and Discipline. The
commander recommended the respondent. be separated from the Air
Force with an Under Other than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) _
Discharge. Since the member is being recommended for an UOTHC
discharge characterization, he is entitled to a hearing before an
administrative discharge board. The respondent consulted with
counsel and submitted a request for an unconditional waiver of a
discharge board on 30 Jul 98. The commander recommends approval
ef the unconditional waiver.

2. As convening authority, you have the following options:

a. Reject the unconditional waiver and direct an
administrative discharge board be convened; or

b. Forward the package to 21 AF/CC (Approval Authority) and
recommend approval of the unconditional waiver with a
service characterization of Honorable, General (under
honorable conditions) or UOTHC.

3. FACTS:

 

a. Personal Data: The respondent is 32 years old. The
respondent’s current enlistment began on 29 Aug 96 for a term of
four years. The respondent's TAFMSD is 26 May 87.

b. For the Government: A preponderance of the evidence
establishes that the respondent committed the following acts and
Pp22e2- 9355
received the following disciplinary actions during the
respondent's current term of service:

DATE OF INCIDENT INCIDENT

1. ,. 1 Dec 97 - 24 Mar 98 Negligent Dereliction of Duty
2. 1 - 28 Feb 98 Negligent Dereliction of Duty
3. 24 Mar 98 False Official Statement

4. 25 Mar 98 False Official Statement

5. 26 Mar 98 Failure to Go

6. 18 - 26 May 98 Absent from Unit

7. 18 May 98 Failure to Obey

8. 18 - 26 May 98 7 Failure to. Obey

For incidents 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, the respondent received an
Article 15 on 15 Apr 98 with a punishment of reduction to the
grade of E-4 (suspended), forfeiture of $150.00 pay per month for
-2 months, and a reprimand. On 2 Jun 98 the commander vacated the
suspended reduction in grade from the 15 Apr 98 Article 15, after
incident 6 occurred. -For incidents 6, 7 and 8, the respondent
received an Article 15 on 10 Jul 98 with a punishment of
reduction to the grade of E-1.

c. For the Respondent: The respondent unconditionally waived
his discharge board. He has submitted matters for your review.
The respondent has received the Air Force Training Ribbon, the
NCO Professional Military Education Graduate Ribbon (1 device),
the Air Force Longevity Service Award Ribbon (1. device), the -
Humanitarian Service Medal, the National Defense Service Medal,
the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (2 devices), the Air Force
Outstanding Unit Award (1 device), the Joint Meritorious Unit
Award, and the Air Force Achievement Medal (1 device). He has 13
Enlisted Performance Reports on file with overall ratings as
follows: 9 (old system), 5, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5. The
close-out date of his last EPR was 2 Jul 97 (before his ,
misconduct occurred) .

4. DISCUSSION: Airmen are subject to discharge for misconduct
based on conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline if the
misconduct causes dissent, disruption and degradation of mission
Tope
.

| FO2a7- 0385
effectiveness. The respondent had two instances of negligent
dereliction of duty, he made two false official statements, he
committed one failure to go, two failures to obey and he was
absent from his unit, all within the last nine months, and all
since his last EPR. He absented himself from work for an entire
week in May 98, during which time he disobeyed lawful regulations
by abusing his Government American Express card and by using his
Government Cellular Phone for personal use.

After receiving an Article 15 and a suspended reduction in rank
for this misconduct, he failed to go to his Flight Chief's Office
on 26 Mar 98. He negligently failed to contact category I and II
Armed Forces Vocational Aptitude Batteries, and he negligently
failed to visit Priority 1 schools in his recruiting area
(twice). He alsa intentionally stated that he contacted his
squadron computer representative, knowing this was false, and he
intentionally stated that he called all Category I and II Armed
Services Vocational Aptitude Batteries, knowing this was false.

He has abused Government property, failed to show up for work,

failed to perform his duties, and lied about it. His actions
indicate he cannot be trusted, and they raise serious concerns
and doubts as to his reliability, integrity and truthfulness.
Thus, there is a basis for discharge. Furthermore, the
respondent should be discharged due to the severity of the
offenses.

After he received his first Article 15 in Apr 98, he subsequently
committed three new offenses, during which time his original
reduction in grade was suspended. He knew, during the time of
these offenses, that further misconduct could result in the
vacation of the suspended reduction in grade. He was on notice
(the first Article 15) that he had to cease his misconduct.
Clearly, he has not learned from his mistakes and his first
Article 15, because he continued his misconduct, as evidenced by
the second Article 15 in Jul 98. His continued pattern of
misconduct shows his disrespect for authority and his.
unsuitability for continued military service. More serious
action was considered for the most recent offenses, however, the
commander exercised his discretion and decided to seek

administrative separation.

An UOTHC discharge is recommended by AFI 36-3208, 5.48.1. An
UOTHC is warranted when an airman demonstrates a pattern of
misbehavior or one or more acts or omissions that constitute a
significant departure from the conduct expected of airmen. A
General discharge may be recommended if the negative aspects of
FD2002- 2355
the airman’s conduct or duty performance outweigh the positive
aspects of the airman’s military record. The respondent's
service may be characterized as Honorable if the member's conduct
and duty performance is otherwise so meritorious that any other
characterization would be inappropriate.

An airman is expected to maintain the highest standards of
discipline and integrity. This respondent's record was
acceptable up to Dec 97, but has been grossly unacceptable since.
He received two Articles 15 in the last nine months, due to eight
instances of misconduct. He caused disruptions in his unit
during this time, and his conduct deteriorated after receiving
his first Article 15. Simply, the respondent's conduct has
demonstrated a pattern significantly departing from that expected
of airmen. His last nine months of service, seriously marred by
ongoing misconduct, demonstrate no positive aspects of service,
and overrides any prior positive aspects of service. Therefore,
a service characterization of UOTHC is appropriate. Furthermore,
Probation and Rehabilitation is inappropriate.’ The respondent.
has not exhibited the ability or desire to conform to the conduct
expected of an airman. oS - oo

5. ERRORS AND IRREGULARITIES: This case has been processed in
substantial compliance with AFI 36-3208. The respondent has been
afforded all the due process rights and protections to which he
is entitled. The case file is legally sufficient to support
discharging the respondent from the Air Force under the basis
recommended by the initiating commander.

6. RECOMMENDATION: That you forward the package to 21 AF/CC
with a recommendation to approve the unconditional waiver,
separating the respondent with a service characterization of
UOTHC. If you concur, please sign the proposed letter attached.

 

eistant Staff Judge Advocate

XY concur.

   

Se USAF
Staff Judge Advocate
FD2802-O3BS SF

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
314th Recruiting Squadron

 

MEMORANDUM FOR .