AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) 

GRADE 

AFSNISSAN 

A1 C 

TYPE 

COUNSEL 
YES 

I  NO 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

N A M E  OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANUA TION 

X  RECORD REVIEW 
ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSFI. 

I 

I 

ISSUES 
A93.09 

IIEARING  DATE 
26 FEB 03 

INDEX NUMBER 
A67.30 

I 

CASE NUMBER 
FD2002-0391 

VOTE OF THE BOARD 

I 
EXHIBITS SUBMITTEDTO THE BOARD 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

APPI,ICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 

2 
3  1  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 
4 
COUNSEL'S  RELEASE TO THE BOARD 
ADDI'TIONAI,  EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

I 

TAPE RECORDING OF PLRSONAI, APPERANCE  HEARING 

ARPLLCANT'S  ISS&  Abm  THE BOARD'S  DECISIONAL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 
5 

REMARKS 

I  Case heard at Washington, D.C. 

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board, the right to a personal appearance withlwithout counsel, and the right to 
submit an application to the AFBCMR. 

550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78 150-4742 

I 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

I 

(EF-V2) 

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCII, 
AIR FORCE DISCI,IARGE REVIEW BOARD 
1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3RD FLOOR 
ANDREWS AFB. MD 20762-7002 

Previous edition will  be used. 

I 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

CASE NUMBER 

FD02-039 1 

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to Honorable. 

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 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. 

ISSUE:  The applicant submitted no issues and requested that the review be completed based on the 
available service record.  The Board reviewed the entire record and found no evidence of impropriety or 
inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of discharge.  The records indicated applicant received an 
Article 15 for failure to report to the immunization clinic to receive an Anthrax vaccination.  The DRB 
opined that 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 reason that was the basis for this 
case.  The Board found no evidence of impropriety or inequity in this case on which to base an upgrade of 
discharge. 

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 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 

ANDREWS AFB,  MD 

(Former AlC)  (HGH  SRA) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd  a GEN Disch fr USAF 12 APR 00 UP AFI 36- 
3208, para 5.52.3  (Misconduct -  Commission of a Serious Offense).  Appeals for 
Honorable Disch. 

2 .   BACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 21 Jan 77. Enlmt Age: 1 7  10/12.  Disch Age:  23 2/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 

AFQT: N/A.  A-77,  E-76,  G-62,  M-57.  PAFSC: 3CO51 -  ~ommunications/~omputer 
Systems Operations Journeyman. DAS: 19 Jul 99. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 14 Dec 94 -  13 Jun 95 '(6 months) (Inactive). 

27 days, all AMS.  AMN-(EPR Indicates): 14 Jun 95-13 Feb 97.  A1C  -  14 Oct 96. 
SRA  -  14 Jun 98.  EPRs: 4,4. 

(2) Enlisted as AB 14 Jun 95 for 4 yrs.  S v d :   3 yrs 7 months 

3 .   SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Reenlisted as SrA 11 Feb 99 for 4 yrs. Svd: 1 Yr 2 Mos 1 Das, all AMS. 

b.  Grade Status:  A1C  -  31 Jan 00  (Article 15, 31 Jan 00) 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15's:  (1) 31 Jan 00, Bolling AFB, DC -  Article 92.  You, having 
knowledge of a lawful order issued by LtCol ------, to 
report to the Bolling AFB, Washington DC Immunization 
Clinic to receive an Anthrax vaccination, an order which 
it was your ,duty to obey, did on or about 13 Dec 99, 
fail to obey the same by failing to report to the 
Bolling AFB, Washington DC Immunization Clinic at the 
date and time prescribed.  Reduction to A1C.  Suspended 
forfeiture of $100.00 pay per month for 2 months. 
(No appeal) (No mitigation) 

e.  Additional: None. 

f.  CM:  None. 
g.  Record of SV: 14 Feb 98 -  13 Feb 99  Eielson AFB  5  (Annual) 

(Discharged from Bolling AFB) 

h.  Awards &  Decs:  AFAM, AFGCM, NDSM, AFOSLTR, AFLSAR, AFTR. 

1 
I 

~ 

1 

I 

I 
I 
I 
I 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS:  ( 5 )  Yrs  ( 4 )   Mos  (0) Das 
TAMS:  (4) Y r s   (10) Mos  (0) Das 

4 .   BASIS ADVANCED FOR  REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 9 Sep 02. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable) 

NO ISSUES SUBMITTED. 

ATCH 
1. Three Character References. 

I 

I 

I 

! 
~ 
1 

w 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

W 

1 1"  WING 

I 

MEMORANDUM FOR HQ 11 SPTGICC 

A?R  0 4  2fl00 

FROM:  HQ I 1  WGIJA 

20 MacDill Blvd Suite 207 
Bolling AFB DC 20332 

drr~inistrative Discharge o 
FPCA, Washington, DC - 

1.  I have reviewed the referenced AFI 36-3208 action. 
(hereafter "respondent"), is a 23-year-old member who  h 
14 June  1995.  The  AFPCA  MSICC  has  initiated discharge  proceedings  under  the 
provisions of AFPD  36-32  and AFI  36-3208,  paragraph 5.52.3,  for  Commission of  a 
Serious Offense.  The respondent was notified of these proceedings on 23 March 2000, 
has consulted counsel, and has subrr~itted a statement for your consideration. The file 
is legally sufficient to support discharge. 

2.  Evidence supporting discharge: 

y

a.  On  13  December  1999,  the  respondent,  having  knowledge of  a  lawful  order 
issued b
to report to the Bolling Air Force Base, 
Washington District of Columbia Immunization Clinic to receive an Anthrax vaccination, 
an order which it was her duty to obey, failed to obey the same by failing to report to the 
Bolling Air  Force Base, Washington  District of Columbia lmmunization Clinic  at  the 
date  and  time  prescribed.  For this misconduct, the respondent  received an Article 15 
dated 31 January 2000 

e

 

Information on the  Respondent:  The  respondent has three  Enlisted Performance 
3. 
Reports (EPRs) on file.  The respondent has been awarded the Air Force Achievement 
Medal,  Air  Force  Good  Conduct Medal,  National Defense Service  Medal,  Air  Force 
Overseas  Ribbon Long,  Air  Force Longevity Setvice Award,  and  Air  Force Training 
Ribbon. 

4.  Medical Information:  The report of medical assessment on the respondent is within 
the package.  There is no medical condition preventing her di8charge. 

5.  Respondent's Statement:  The respondent requests that she receive an Honorable 
Discharge because of her service achievements. 

WORLD CLASS PEOPLE ... WORLD CLASS SUPPORT 

8 

,c,:: 

. . .. 
L'  .*$s:': 
j:; 
,<+::, 

'?. .  -/' 
.  ..../ / 

6.  Discharge  Considerations:  This  discharge  action  raises  four  issues  for  your 
consideration:  whether  the  respondent is  subject  to  discharge;  if  the  respondent  is 
subject to discharge, whether the respondent be discharged; if discharged, what is the 
appropriate characterization of service; and whether the respondent should be offered 
Probation and Rehabilitation IAW AFI 36-3208, Chapter 7. 

a.  The Respondent is Subject to Discharge:  Under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, 
paragraph 5.52.3, an enlisted member is subject to discharge for misconduct based on 
the commission of a serious offense if a punitive discharge would be authorized for the 
same or a closely related offense under the  UCMJ.  Discharge processing should  be 
initiated if the specific circumstances of the offense warrant separation. 

b.  The Respondent Should be Discharged:  The respondent should be discharged 
because  she  has  demonstrated  that  she  is  unwilling  to  conform  to  the  standards 
expected of  airmen in the  United States Air  Force.  'The  respondent  has  had ample 
opportunity to conform to military standards.  The respondent has blatantly disregarded 
her military obligations and can not be made a  productive member of the Air  Force. 
Therefore, the respondent should be discharged. 

c.  Appropriate Service Characterization:  Under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, the 
respondent may be discharged with a service characterization of Honorable, General or 
Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC). 

(1)  Under  paragraph  1.18,  a  General  Discharge  is  appropriate  when  the 
member's service has been honest and faithful but is outweighed by significant negative 
aspects  of  the  member's  record.  The  facts  in  this  case  support  a  service 
characterization of General. 

(2)  An  Honorable Discharge is given when the  quality  of the  airman's  service 
generally has met Air Force standards of acceptable conduct and performance of duty 
or when a member's  service is othetwise so meritorious that any other characterization 
would be inappropriate.  In this case, an Honorable Discharge is not warranted because 
of the disciplinary actions taken against the respondent.  There is no evidence ,that the 
respondent's "service is otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would 
be inappropriate." 

(3)  A  UOTHC  discharge  is  appropriate when  the  reason for  separation  is  "a 
significant departure from the conduct expected of airman." Such examples include use 
of  forcelviolence  to  produce  serious  bodily  injuriesldeath or  acts  of  omissions  that 
endanger the healthlwelfare of other Air Force members.  In this case, the respondent's 
misconduct does not warrant a UOTHC discharge. 

d.  Probation and Rehabilitation:  Probation and Rehabilitation under the provisions 
of  Chapter 7 should  not  be offered  to  the  respondent in this  case,  because  of  the 

seriousness of  her  rr~isconduct and  ,the respondent's  demonstrated  unwillingness  to 
comply with Air Force standards. 

7.  Options:  You have the following options with respect to this discharge: 

a.  Retain the respondent in ,the Air  Force by returning the package to the initiating 

corr~mander and terminating the discharge proceedings; or 

b.  Order the separa,tion of ,the respondent with a General Discharge with or without 

offering Probation and Rehabilitation; or 

c.  Foward  the  package  to  HQ  11  WGICC  with  a  recommendation  that  the 

respondent be discharged with an Honorable or UOTHC Discharge. 

8.  Recommendations:  I recommend that you separate the respondent with a General 
Discharge without Probation and Rehabilitation.  'This  may be accomplished by signing 
the attached document. 

Attachments: 
I. Draft Discharge Order 
2.  11 CSICC Recommendation, 30 March 00 
3. 
4. 

atement, 27 Mar 00 

T@ 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

;(a F p m ~ - d 3 7 /  

1 l m  WING 

L 

MAR  2 3  2000 

MEMORANDUM FOR 0 

FROM:  I 1  CSICC 

20 MacDill Blvd Suite 102 
Bolling AFB DC 20332-0403 

SUBJECT:  Notification Memorandum 

I. I am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for Comwrission 
of a Serious Offense.  The authority for this action is AFPD  36-32  and AFI  36-3208, 
paragraph  5.52.3. 
If  my  recommendation  is  approved,  your  service  will  be 
characterized  as  Honorable or  General.  I am  recommending that  your  service  be 
characterized as General without Probation and Rehabilitation. 

2.  My reasons for this action are: 

a.  On  13  December  1999,  you,  having  knowledge of  a  lawful order  issued by 
to  report  to  the  Bolling  Air  Force  Base, 
ation Clinic to receive an Anthrax vaccination, 
an order which it was your duty to obey, failed to obey the same by failing to report to 
the  Bolling Air Force Base, Washington  District of  Colurrrbia  lrnmurrization  Clinic  at 
the date  and  time  prescribed.  For this rrrisconduct, you  received  an  Article 15 dated 
31 January 2000 (Atch I). 

3.  Copies of the documents to  be forwarded to the separatio~i 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. 
If you are discharged, you will  be ineligible for reenlistnient in the Air  Force and  any 
special pay, bonus, or education assistance funds may be subject to recoupment. 

4.  You  have the right to counsel.  Military legal counsel has 
been obtained to assist 
you.  I have made an appointment for you to consult Capt \---------- [  the Area  Defense 
Counsel,  Bldg.  1430, Andrews AFB  MD,  (240) 857-6624 on 24 March 2000,  at  1030 
hours.  You may consult civilian counsel at your own expense. 

- - - - - - - - - - -  

5.  You have been scheduled for a medical examination.  You must report to the Bolling 
AFB Clinic, Bldg. 1300, on 22 March 2000 at 0800 hours for ,the examination. 

WORLD CLASS PEOPLE ... WORLD CLASS SUPPORT 

6.  You have the right to  submit a statement on your own behalf.  Any statements you 
want the separation authority to consider must reach me within 3 duty days of receipt of 
this notification, unless you request and receive an approved extension.  I will send any 
documents you submit to the separation authority. 

7.  If you fail to consult counsel or to submit statements on your behalf, your failure will 
constitute a waiver of your right to do so. 

8.  Any  personal information you furnish in rebuttal is  covered  by the  Privacy Act of 
1974.  A copy of AFI  36-3208, is available for your use in your orderly room. 

Attachments: 
Article 15, dtd 31 Jan 00.