I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) 

GRADE 

AYSNISSAN 

HEARING DATE 
041503 

CASE NUMBER 
FD2002-0400 

I 

I 

I 

3  1  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 
4 
COUNSE12'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD 
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT  TIME OF 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 
I TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING 

I 

I REMARKS 
Case heard at Washington, D.C. 

I  Change reenlistment code to permit n-entry into military 

+ Change narrative reason for discharge to "Secretarial Authority" 

I Advise the applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to submit an spplicatiorto the AFBCMR. 

WEST, SUITE 40 
FB, TX 78150-4742 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

CASE NIJMBKR 

FD2002-0400 

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for an upgrade - - - - - - - - -  
his re-enlistment code.  The applicant and SMSgt ! 
before the Board at Andrews AFB, MD, on April 15,2003. 

discharge to honorable and a change in 

i, his father, appeared and testified 

of his general 

----------. 

L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  

The applicant submitted the following items as exhibits:  Law Enforcement Training Certificate dated 
15 Feb 03, Law Enforcement Proficiency Demonstration dated 15 Feb 03, Test Results for Florida State 
Officer Examination dated 26 Feb 03. 

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant, the factors leading to the discharge, 
and the issues he submitted for review. 

FINDINGS:  The applicant's request to change the characterization of his discharge to honorable and a 
change to his re-enlistment code is denied. 

Issue #1: The applicant contends that his overall service record is more deserving of a fully honorable 
discharge rather than the general under honorable conditions discharge he received.  The respondent's 
record shows he received an Article 15 for sleeping on post, repeatedly failed to report to work on time, 
maintained his dormitory room in a state of disarray, and left his room without authority when he was 
supposed to be on quarters. His misconduct is well documented and outweighs the positive aspects of his 
service.  Based on the foregoing, the Board concluded his commander appropriately characterized his 
service as general, 

Issue #2:  The applicant contends there was "no progression of discipline" in the counselings/reprimands he 
received from his superiors. The Board noted the governing instruction does not require successively 
higher-ranking individuals to impose administrative sanctions in order for an administrative discharge to be 
effective.  Despite the foregoing, our review of the record reveals the respondent was counseled and 
reprimanded by a number of individuals at different levels in his chain of command.  The Board concluded 
this issue was without merit. 

The Board also reviewed and considered the applicant's entire service record before making a decision. 

CONCLUSIONS:  The Discharge Review Board concludes the applicant's discharge was consistent with 
the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation, was within the discretion of the 
discharge authority, and that the applicant received full administrative due process.  For these reasons, the 
Board denies the applicant's request to upgrade his general discharge and to change his re-enlistment code. 

Attachment: 
Examiner's Brief 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW  BOARD 

ANDRGWS  AFB,  MD 

MISSING MEDICAL RECORDS 

FD2002-0400 

(Former A1C)  (HGH AlC) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd  a GEN Disch fr USAF 8 Feb 02 UP AFI 36-3208, 
para 5.49 (Misconduct -  Minor Disciplinary Infractions).  Appeals for Honorable 
Disch. 

2 .   BACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 11 Mar 81.  Enlmt Age: 18 5/12.  Disch Age: 20 10/12, Educ: HS 
DIPL.  AFQT: N/A.  A-40,  E-62,  G-48,  M-48. PAFSC: 3P031 -  Security Police 
Apprentice. DAS: 17 Nov 00, 

b.  Prior Sv:  (1) AFRes 20 Aug  99 -  13 Jun 00 ( 9  Mos 25 Days) (~nactive) . 

3 .  

SERVICE  UNDER  REVIEW: 

a.  Enld as A1C 14 Jun 00 for 4 yrs. Svd: 1 Yr 7 Mos 26 Das, all M S .  

b.  Grade Status:  None. 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15's:  (1) 25 Jun 01, Tyndall AFB, FL -  Article 113.  You, were, 

on or about 11 Jan 01, being posted as a sentinel, found 
sleeping upon your post.  Forfeiture of $100.00 pay per 
month for 2 months, and a reprimand. (No appeal)  (No 
mitigation) 

e.  Additional: LOR, 17 JAN 02 -  Failure to obey a lawful oxder and making 

a false official statement. 

LOR, 30 DEC 01 - Late f o r   duty. 
LOR, 30 NOV  01 - Failure to maintain dormitory room in 
inspection order, safety and security 
violations. 

LOR, 16 NOV  01 - Late for duty. 
LOR, 04 NOV  01 - Late for duty, failure to meet dress and 

I 

appearance standards, and failure to 
maintain dormitory room within acceptable 
standards of cleaniness. 

LOR, 31 OCT 01 -  Second offense being asleep on duty. 

f .   CM:  None. 

g .   Record of SV: None. 

(Discharged fxom Tyndall AFB) 

h.  Awards &  Decs:  AFTR, AFOUA, AFEM. 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS: (2) Yrs  (5) Mos  (20) Das 
TAMS: (1) Yr  (7) Mos  ( 2 6 )  Das 

4 .   BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 2 9 3 )  dtd 29 Aug 02. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable) 

Issue:  I am requestig your consideration for upgrading my military 

discharge.  As supported by documents attached, I served during the period 
November 2000  to September 2001, receiving two certificates of appreciation, a 
letter of appreciation and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.  Beginning in 
October 2001, after my return from Saudi Arabia, I began to experience personal 
difficulties in my relationship and financial difficulties.  This began to 
effect my professional duties as noted in seven LORs documented during the 
period of October 2 0 0 1   to January 2002.  After several LORs it became a joke by 
my peers inquiring if I had signed my LOR again.  I did not take my superiors 
serious due to the many LORs issued.  I was not given any informal disciplinary 
action (RMT)  to indicate their seriousness.  1 discussed my personal and 
military problems with my father who is currently on active duty in the Air 
Force and based upon his recommendation I sought professional counseling through 
the Life Management Center at Tyndall Air Force Base, FL.  The phychologist and 
I were able to identify the external problems that were affecting my 
professional duties and were causal factors in my various minor infractions. 
Unfortunately at this point, I was only able to attend three counseling sessions 
due the  (sic) upgraded "FPCONh after the terrorist attack on 9/11.  I feel that 
the timing of our national Lhreat hendered  (sic) my ability to correct my 
personal life as well as my professional career in the Air Force.  I feel 
confident, that given time and additional counseling I would have overcome my 
difficulties and achieved higher goals. 

ATCW 
1. Discharge Documents.. 
2. Letter of Reference 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

AIR EDUCATlON AND TRAINING COMMAND 

. I 

1

1

 

MEMORANDUM FOR 325 FW/CC 

FROM:  325 FWIJA 

325 SFS 

8 , I  JAN  2002 

1.  I have reviewed the attached discharge file c o n c e r n i n g ( . l l l l r  
both procedwally correct and legally suficient to support his discharge. 

and I find it 

2.  Background  The 325 SFSfCC notified- 
on 23 January 2002. 
Chapter 5, Section H, 
a
e
(General) discharge. 

n

d

r

,

of his intent to recommend discharge 

mmander recommends discharge under AFI 36-3208 
duct, specifically Minor Disciplinary Infractions. 6 
recommends an Under Honorable Conditions 
l

 

repeatedly failed to meet Air Force standards, disobeyed 

3.  Basis for Discharge.  A  member is discharged for misconduct when he or she fails to 
maintain, both on and off duty, the high standards of personal conduct set forth for members of 
the Air Force.  -has 
orders, and failed to take responsibility for his actions.  He was found sleeping on post on two 
occasions.  He received an Article 15 Nonjudicial Punishment action for the second incident.  In 
his response to that action, while stating he accepted responsibility, he consistently gave excuses 
for his actions.  He attempted to justie falling asleep because he was up all night with a woman 
he referred to as his "fianch." This woman was in fact married to another man at the time the 
incident occurred, a fact that was well known to'
Nevertheless, he stated in his 
response that he intended to move in with her in the near future, although they did not have 
marriage plans.  He neglected to mention the reason no marriage plans existed was because his 
"fianc6e"  was already a married womah. w hat -would 
for neglect of his duties due to staying up all night with the wife of another man illustrates his 
complete and utter failure to understand Air Force standards.  Furthermore, 
continued to be involved in misconduct on several occasions after receiving the Article 15. He 
failed to go to his place of duty at the appointed time three times within a two month period, 
disobeyed the orders of both his superiors in the 325 SFS and the quarters order of a 325 MDG 
physician, and lied to his superiors on two occasions.  Additionally, his dorm room was not 
within standards on two occasions, and he failed to maintain his dress and appearance. 
-consistently 
irresponsible and untrustworthy.  He continues to fail to accept responsibility for his actions or 

failed to meet Air Force standards, and demonstrated himself to be 

ask for special consideration 

 

even understand that his behavior is inappropriate, as evidenced by the response he submitted to 
this discharge action, which will be discussed in the following paragraph. a p p e
s
to completely fail to understand that rules and standards apply to all Air Force members, or that 
he is responsible for his own actions.  His actions clearly form a basis for discharge. 

a

r

WWDZ - Dydd 

 

4,  Matters Submitted by Respondent u b m i
t e d  a written statement, a letter 
from his Area Defense Counsel, character statements from his father and three of his father's 
fiends, a LOE, several certificates of appreciation, and some medical documentation concerning 
a knee condition. These statements, if anything, emphasize the need to discharge this airman. 

t

three and a half page statement is an illustration of the complete irresponsibility 

. 

and untrustworthiness of this airman.  He states he started to "turn his life around" in January 
2001, after receiving an Article 15 for sleeping on post.  However, after this supposed catharsis, 
this dman engaged in sleeping on post again, lying to supervisors, disobeying orders, and 
failing to go. He essentially asks for this behavior to be excused because of difficulties in his 
personal life, specifically the fact that his fiancbe had a relationship with another man while he 
was TDY, and married this other individual. !continued 
with hisSwfianc6e" throughout the course of her marriage to her civilian spouse, and actively 
attempted to destroy the marriage; his involvement with this married woman caused- 
-to 
the Article 15 action he received for sleeping on post, he offered his relationship with this 
woman as an excuse for his actions, explaining he spent the night with her, and stated his intent 
to move in with her.  He failed to mention that she was married to another man, evincing an 
intent to mislead his commander. 

experience stress which he claims impacted his duty performance.  In his response to 

his romantic involvement 

offers this relationship as an excuse for the 

In his response to this action, -gain 
myriad of disciplinary problems he experienced since returning from Saudi Arabia. He states that 
the unprofessional relationship he had with a married woman should be excused because "we 
were not committing adultery,"  and that the failure of the 325 SFS leadership to be "supportive" 
of his relationship caused his misconduct. As a result of "xcessive 
involvement 
with this married woman, his response to the Article 15 action in which he evinced an intent to 
cany on an unprofessional romantic relationship with her, and statements he made to 9 
-that 
he intended to remain actively romantically involved with the woman he referred to 
as his 'Trancee" despite her marriage, 
issued a no contact order.  Instead of 
o the effect that he did not intend to 
accepting the order, he made stateme 
obey the order.  In his response to this acti 
ere was no reason to stop me from 
seeing my fianck.. . [she] did not want the order and I did not want the order."  Statements such 
as these show a continued inability to understand the need for good order and discipline, and to 
act in a professional manner that does not bring discredit upon the Air Force.  The respondent 
also states that since he believed his "fiancee"  was pregnant with his child, the SFSICC acted 
unreasonably by issuing him a no-contact order. It should be noted that without a blood test, it 
cannot be determined who the biological father of the woman's  child is.  Furthermore, in many 
states even if a man is the biological father of a child who is born to the wife of another man, the 
woman's  spouse is considered the legal father of the child and the biological father has no legal 
rights such as visitation.  Legal challenges by biological fathers to this system have routinely 
failed. The law does not support the respondent's assertion that he is entitled to carry on an 
unprofessional relationship with a married woman because she may be carrying his child.  Not 
only does 

seek to excuse his unprofessional relationship, which was not even cited 

as a basis for discharge in this action, he actually seeks to use the stress of engaging in a romantic 
relationship with another man's wife as an excuse for the on duty misconduct cited in this action. 
This is reprehensible and is conduct that cannot be tolerated if good order and discipline is to be 
maintained. 

several statements to the effect of that he was getting 
Furthermore,-makes 
underserved LORs.  These LOR's  were issued for lying to supervisors, failutes to go, and 
disobeying orders.  Several were issued for multiple offenses.  None of the LORS were excessive 
responses to the misconduct cited therein; in fact, other airman in his squadron received Article 
15 actions for conduct similar to that cited in some of the respondent's LOR's. 

The next item the respondent submitted was a statement from his ADC 
attacks the legality of the no-contact order issu 
-istakenly 
the 325 SFSICC was well within his rights to issue this order.  Flagrantly ca 
unprofessional relationship with the spouse of a civilian in the local community is prejudicial to 
good order and discipline and casts discredit upon the Air Force. A no-contact order is an 
appropriate way to deal with such a situation; the protection of good order and discipline is a 
valid military purpose to issue a no-contact order.  However, because neither the unprofessional 
relationship itself nor any violation of the no contact order is relied upon as a basis for discharge 
in this action, attacks on the order are irrelevant. 
paperwork the respondent received was "fairly g 
-ere 
for similar offenses. 

eminently fair and consistent with discipline given to others in his squadron 

further states not all of the 
inary actions taken against 

I, 
First, 

-1so 
-s 

. 

submitted statements by his father and three of his father's fiends. 

a 20 year old security forces member who should be able to accept responsibility for 
his actions without the need to rely on his father and his father's connections to attempt avoid the 
consequences of his actions. 
condition, which is utterly irr 
not impact his propensity to engage in disciplinary infiactions. He also submitted several 
certificates of appreciation. 

submitted medical documentation of a knee 
n since any knee condition he may have had did 

receive a General or Honorable 

right to a discharge board,  if you feel that an Under Other Than Honorable 

5.  Characterization of  Discharge.  -may 
discharge.  Alternatively, the discharge process could be reinitiated in order to extend t o m  
e 
Conditions discharge is more appropriate. The 325 SFSICC recommends-ervice 
be characterized as General.  The negative aspects of his service outweigh the positive aspects of 
his military service.-as 
fails to accept responsibility.  His conduct involves flagrant disregard for Air Force standards and 
the orders of his supervisors.  He acts only to fhther his own personal benefit, and fails to have 
concern for the effects of his actions on his squadron and the Air Force.  He was given numerous 
chances to improve, but instead of adhering to standards he blames Security Forces leadership 
for not being understanding of the stress caused by his relationship with a married woman. 

consistently been involved in misconduct for which he 

'\ 

6. Lega l and Procedural A~jficiency. 

a.  The case file is free fiom any errors or irregularities that would substantially 

prejudice any of the respondent's substantive or procedural rights.  My review 
indicates a sufficient amount of evidence to support discharge. 

b.  ond duct has not been of the nature that the Air 'Force expects of its 
Airmen.  He has been involved in numerous incidents of misconduct, and has failed 
to respond to corrective efforts including verbal counseling, Letters of Reprimand, 
and an Article 15.  Even after receiving correction, he has continued to engage in 
the misconduct.  He continues to fail to take responsibility for his actions, and 
believes he should receive special treatment due to "stress."  Both his actions and his 
attitude are inconsistent with military service. 

7. Probation and Rehabilitation. 
recommend probation and rehabili 
status would be inconsistent with good order and disc 
rehabilitative efforts, and none have been successful. 
appreciate the nature of his conduct or accept responsibility for it.  As long he is unable or 
unwilling to accept responsibility and continues to blame others for his problems attempts at 
rehabilitation will be ineffective. -has 
he does not need to follow the rules applid to others.  The immaturity of this airman's logic is 
shown by his assertion that his on duty misconduct should be excused due to the stress of 
carrying on an unprofessional relationship with another man's wife. 

adron has tried numerous 
,continues to fail to 

no real desire to change because he believes 

8.  Options. As the SPCM convening authority, you may: 

a.  decide the case is without merit and retain' 

or 

b.  order the case initiated again, extending the respondent the right to a board hearing, 

if you believe separation with an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions 
discharge is more appropriate; or 

c.  approve the respondent's separation with a General discharge, with or without 

probation and rehabilitation; or 

d.  forward the file to 19 AF/CC with the recommendation that he direct that the 

respondent be discharged with an Honorable discharge. 

9.  I recommend that you direct that -be 
without probation and rehabilitation. 

discharged with a General discharge 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 

AIR  EDUCATION AND TRAINING COMMAND 

2 3  JAN  2002 

FROM: 325 SFSICC 

SUBJECT:  Notification Memorandum-Administrative  Discharge 

1.  I am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for Misconduct:  Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions.  The authority for this action is Air Force Policy Directive 36-32 and 
Air  Force  Instruction  36-3208,  Chapter  5,  Section H,  para  5.49. 
If  my  recommendation  is 
approved, yow service will be characterized as honorable or general.  I am recommending your 
service be characterized as general. 

- 

2.  My reasons for this action are: 

1) You, having knowledge of a lawful ~ r d e r  to remain in your quarters issued by a 325th 
Medical  Group physician, at or near  Tyndall Air  Force Base, Florida,  on  or about  8 January 
2002, failed to obey the same. 

a.  As evidenced by a LOR dated 17 January 2002: 

- at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 8 January 2002. 

Explorer, which statement was totally false and then known by you to be false, to- 

b.  You  did,  at  or near Tyndall Air  Force Base,  Florida,  on  or about 29  December  2001, 
without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, as evidenced 
by a LOR dated 30 December 200 1.  (Atch 1 b) 

2) You made a false official statement, to wit:  that you were not off base in a green Ford 

c.  You did, at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 27 November 2001, fail 
to  maintain your  dormitory  room  within  acceptable standards of  cleanliness,  in  violation  of 
TAFBI 32-6002, as evidenced by a LOR dated 30 November 2001.  (Atch lc) 

d.  You, having knowledge of a lawful order issued to you b

w

a

n

d

 ql 

to wit: be at -office 

at 0800 hours on  19 November 2001, 
did, on or about 19 November 200 1, at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, fail to obey the 
same, as evidenced by a LOR dated 30 November 2001.  (Atch  1 d) 

e.  You  did,  at  or near Tyndall Air  Force Base,  Florida, on  or about  16 November  200 1, 
without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, as evidenced 
by a LOR dated 1 6 November 200 1.  (Atch 1 e) 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

I 

I 
I 

i 

I 

f.  As evidenced by a LOR dated 4 November 2001 : 

1) You  did,  at  or near  Tyndall Air  Force Base,  Florida, o n  or about 4 November  2001, 

without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty. 

2) You did, at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 4 November 2001, fail 
to maintain your dress and appearance within acceptable standards, in violation of AFI 36-2903. 

3) You did, at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 4 November 2001, fail 
to  maintain  your  dormitory room  within  acceptable standards of  cleanliness, in  violation  of 
TAFBI 32-6002. 

4) You made a false official  statement, to wit:  that you had a pair of acceptably shined 
, which statement was totally false and then known 
at or near Tyndall Air 

combat boots drying 
by you 'to be  false, t 
Force Base, Florida, o 

g.  You, were, at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 18 October 2001, being 
posted  as a sentinel, found sleeping upon your post,  as evidenced by  a LOR dated 3 1 October 
2001.  (Atch 1 g) 

h.  As evidenced by Article 15 finalized 26 January 200 1 : 

You, were, at or near Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, on or about 1 1 January 2001, being 

posted as a sentinel, found sleeping upon you post.  (Atch  1 h) 

3.  Copies  of  the  documents to  be  forwarded  to  the  separation authority  in  support  of  this 
recommendation are attached.  The commander exercising special court-martial 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 reenlistment in the Air  Force  and  will  probably be 
denied enlistment in any component of the armed forces. 

4.  You have the right to consult legal counsel.  M 
you.  An appointment has been made for you to co 
Counsel, Bldg.  1005 (3-291 1) at 
on 
legal counsel at your own expense. 

/coo 

5.  You have the right to submit statements on your own behalf.  Any statements you want the 
separation authority to consider must reach me within three (3) workdays unless you request and 
receive an  extension, in writing,  for showing good  cause.  I  will  send them  to the separation 
authority. 

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

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 

7.  You have been scheduled for a medical records check as part of this discharge process.  You 
must report to the NCOIC, Physical Examinations, Building 1465, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday 
or Friday between 1330 and 1500 to complete this medical records check. 

8.  You have been scheduled for a separations briefing.  You must report to. 325 MSStDPMAR 
(Separations) section at 

on 

9.  Any personal information you  fwnish in rebuttal is covered by the Privacy Act.  A  copy of 
AFI 36-3208 is available for your use in the unit personnel office. 

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

Commander, 325 SFS 

- 

Attachments: 
1 a.  LOR, dated 17 Jan 02 
1 b.  LOR, dated 30 Dec 0 1 
lc.  LOR,  dated 30 Nov 01 
ld.  LOR, dated 30 Nov 0 1 
le.  LOR,  dated 16Nov01 
1 f.  LOR,  dated 4 Nov 0 1 
lg. LOR, dated 3 1 Oct 0 1 
1 h.  Article 15, dated 26 Jan 01 
2.  Airman's Receipt of Notification Memorandum 

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY