AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL) AFSN/SSAN

  
 
 
 
  

 

 

TYPE”
GEN PERSONAL APPEARANCE

COUNSEL NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION

ves [no |

   

    

X RECORD REVIEW

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

 

 

 

 

VOTE OF THE BOARD”. -

MEMBERS SITTING HON pices DOTHC DENY

 

 

 

 

INDEX NUMBER 5 __ EXHINITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD

    
   

 

A01.01, A01.43, A01.55 A67.10 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

03-03-07 FD2002-0409 COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

  
  

 

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF \
PERSONAL APPEARANCE =

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING
NoL ARE DISCUSSED ON.THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE.

 

CANT'S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL

 

REMARKS — —_ . .
ge

Case heard at Washington, D.C. ‘

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to
submit an application to the AFBCMR.

 

 

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 06-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will be used.
CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | yp2002-0409

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 nor that provided by the applicant substantiates an
impropriety or inequity that would justify an upgrade of the discharge to honorable.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. He had a verbal counseling, four
Letters of Reprimand, and an Unfavorable Information File (UIF). His misconduct included failure to go,
failure to pay an overdue bill, failure to renew his British vehicle road tax and driving on base without it,
two civilian convictions for driving while intoxicated, and thrice failing to provide a breath test when
requested to by law enforcement authorities. Member was referred to the base alcohol rehabilitation
program, but denied he had a problem with alcohol, thus it was deemed he could not be rehabilitated. At the
time of the discharge, member consulted counsel and waived his right to submit a statement in his own
behalf. Applicant now contends his discharge should be upgraded because of a clerical error in the
notification and recommendation documents. In reviewing the record, the Board noted that the letter of
notification member received stated he could be given either a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge, or an honorable discharge, and that the commander was recommending an honorable discharge.
Additionally, the receipt of notification that member signed acknowledges that member realized he could
receive either a general or honorable discharge. However, the letter of recommendation to the convening
authority who would decide member’s characterization of service, from the unit commander, recommends
member receive a general discharge (contrary to the notification letter which said the commander was
recommending an honorable discharge). Likewise, the legal review provided the convening authority notes
the unit commander recommended a general discharge. In a letter written “To Whom It May Concern”
three days before member’s general discharge was executed, provided to the discharge review board by the
applicant, the unit commander states the recommendation letter was in error in that he intended to
recommend an honorable discharge, and the orderly room staff that had prepared the letter had made a
serious administrative error. He further states neither the base personnel office nor the base legal office
supported re-accomplishing member’s package due to the imminence of member’s departure port call, but
would support a subsequent discharge upgrade or correction to records. The Board noted the absence of
similar supporting letters from personnel office or legal office staff members, and opined that although the
recommendation letter may have been in error, it was not a harmful error in that member was notified and
acknowledged he could receive either a general or honorable characterization of service, and it was the
convening authority’s decision as to which characterization was appropriate based on member’s record and
incidents of misconduct. After review of all of the documents, including the letter of notification wherein
the commander stated he intended to recommend an honorable discharge, the convening authority had the
grounds on which to determine member should receive a general discharge. The Board noted member was
given many opportunities to correct his behavior but was either unwilling or unable to do so. Member was
responsible for his actions and was held accountable for them because his misconduct was disruptive. The
board did not find sufficient mitigation to warrant an upgrade at this time, and no clear inequity or
impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.
FD2002-0409

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

(Former A1C) (HGH A1C)

 

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec'd a GEN Disch fr USAF 18 Dec 89 UP AFR 39-10,
para 5-46 (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions). Appeals for Honorable
Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 4 Sep 63. Enlmt Age: 22 5/12. Disch Age: 26 3/12. Educ: HS DIPL.
AFQT: N/A. A-72, E-78, G-84, M-93. PAFSC: 45254C - Repair and Reclamation
Specialist. DAS: 9 Dec 86.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 18 Feb 86 ~ 28 May 86 (3 months 11 days) (Inactive).

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Enlisted as AB 29 May 86 for 4 yrs. Svd: 3 Yrs 6 Mo 20 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: A1C - 29 Mar 88
Amn - (APR Indicates): 29 May 86-28 May 87

c. Time Lost: None.

d. Art 15’s: None.

e. Additional: LOR, 8 SEP 89 - Conviction for driving under the influence
of alcohol.
LOR, 3 FEB 89 - Failure to renew road tax.
LOR, 7 Dec 87 - Failure to provide a breath specimen via
the intoximeter,
MFR, 4 JUN 87 - Financial irresponsibility.
LOR, 26 FEB 87 - Failure to go.

Ff. CM: None.

g. Record of SV: 29 May 86 - 28 May 87 RAF Upper Heyford 9 (Annual)
' 29 May 87 - 28 May 88 RAF Upper Heyford 9 (Annual)

29 May 88 - 28 May 89 RAF Upper Heyford 4 (Annual)

29 May 89 ~ 14 Nov 89 RAF Upper Heyford 2 (HAF Dir)

(Discharged from McGuire AFB)

h. Awards & Decs: AFOSLTR, AFTR, AFOUA, AFGCM, BTAMB.

1. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (3) Yrs (10) Mos (1) Das
TAMS: (3) Yrs (6) Mos (20) Das
FD2002-0409

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 24 Sep 02.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

Issue 1: Clerical error.

ATCH
1. Character Reference.
2. DD Form 214.

‘20DECO2/ia
¢ é
# o CONSTITUTig,
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE # %,
HEADQUARTERS 20TH TACTICAL FIGHTER WING (USAFE) f %
APO NEW YORK 09154-5000 % i
4 |
4! i
re of oe

 

REPLY TO .
amor = JA Re /2945 ) 27 Noverber 1989

Review of AFR 39-10 strative Discharge, Letter of Notification -

SUBJECT:

   

TO: ce
1. Basis of Action: «guages the respondent's squadron section

commander, initiated discharge action under the provisions of paragraph 5-46,

Section H, Chapter 5, 39-10, for minor disciplinary infractions. He has
recommended that eceive a al discharge without suspension for
probation and rehabilitation due commana inability to adapt to military

life. You may elect the following:
a. RetainggQii@mrand discontinue the action, or

b. Direct that@gQiMliebe separated with a general discharge, with or
without suspension for probation and rehabilitation, or

c. Forward the case file to the 3AF/CC with a recommendation for an
honorable discharge with or without suspension for probation and rehabilita-

tion, or

d. If you feel an Under Other Than Honorable Conditions discharge js.
warranted, refer the case to an administrative discharge board.

Your decision should be made only after a thorough review of the case file.
2. Evidence in Support of the Discharge:

a. On 26 Feb 1987 Apps es to attend a FTD flight control class
for which he received a le reprimand.

b. On 4 June 1967 gillian: notified that his club bill was 60 davs
overdue, and he received ver counselling.

c. On 8 Oct 196 REMIRA x22; ved a court conviction for driving &
motor vehicle while uffit ough drink or drugs. The court disqualified
him from driving for one year and fined him 50 pounds. The squadron
established a UIF and did not recommend him for promotion.

d. On 30 Jan 1989 qi taited to renew his road tax for which he
received a letter of reprimand and a UIF was established.

e. On 16 Oct 1989, Mreceived a court conviction for driving a
motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol in excess of the prescribed
limit. As punishment, he was disqualified for three years, assessed 4
points and fined 360 pounds. A letter of reprimand was placed in his UIF.

Right People. Right Mission. Right Now. .
[b72002- 0404

3. Rehabi ilitation Effort Efforts:  ccsveneeeel indicated in his recommendation that
alin vas <1 counselled on ‘ous asions by his superiors. He was

given letters of counseling and letters of reprimand and a UIF was

established. The adron referred him to Social Actions for alcohol

rehab Litation. SMG sta at the rehab meeting that he did not have a

problem with al 7 an indication that he cannot be rehabilitated.
PEER res fully aware of the consequences for his continued substandard

conduct and behavior.

4. Evidence on Behalf of the Respondent : weit, is a 26 year old
Repair and Reclamation Speciali st on a 4 year enlistment, with a TAFMSD of
29 May 1986. His assignment to his current unit began on 9 December 1986.
He has received four EPRs

29 May 89 to 14 Nov 89 = 2
29 May 88 to 28 May 89 = 4
29 May 87 to 28 May 88 = 9
29 May 86 to 28 May 87 = 9

After consultation with military counsel, “(@QQQRMIP bas not submitted any
statements.

~welhige bas the Air Force Training Ribbon and the Air Force Outstanding
' Unit Award.

5. Errors and Irregularities: The evidence sufficiently supports the |
recommended discharge action. ‘The provisions of paragraphs 5-2, 6-8 and
6-9 of AFR 39-10 have been substantially complied with in this discharge
action.

6. Discussion:

a. All of the respondent's substantive and procedural rights have been

satisfied. This case is legally sufficient to support a discharge for
minor disciplinary infractions.

b. Before recommending this dischar ial exhausted all areas
of administrative action. Gite: shown adh his conduct that he
has a problem adapting to the military and the Air Force way of life.

Therefore, he is a poor candidate for probation and rehabilitation.
( Pozeen-oHet

7. Recommendation: I recommend tha las be discharged with a
discharge without suspe sion for probe tion and rehabilitation.
r | wn Fp2002-9707

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

20TH EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SQUADRON (USAFE)
APO NEW YORK 09194-5000

 

REPLY TO
ATTN OF: ofa IS Nov $4
SUBJECT: Letter of Notification .

TO:

 

1. am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for.
minor disciplinary infractions. The authority for thia action is AFR 39-10,
paragraph 5-46. If my recommendation is approved, your service will be
characterized as honorable or general. I am recommending that your service be

characterized as honorable.
2. My reasons for this action are:

a. On 16 Oct 89, you received a court conviction for driving a motor
vehicle having consumed alcohol in excess of the prescribed limit. You were
disqualified for 3 years, assessed 4 points and fined 360 pounds. A letter of
reprimand was placed in your UIF.

be On 30 Jan 89, you had your automobile on base and failed to renew your
road tax for which you received a letter of reprimand and a UIF was
established.

 

ad. On 8 Oct 87, you received a court conviction for driving a motor
vehicle while unfit through drink or drugs. You were disqualified from
driving for one year and fined 50 pounds. A UIF was established and you were
not recommended for promotion

e. On 4 Jun 87, you were notified your club bill was 60 days overdue {gr
which you were verbally counseled. As shai on he MFR. dated “+ HL Ton ‘].

f. On 26 Feb 87, you failed to attend a PTD flight control class for
which you received a letter of reprimand. o 2%

Right People. Right Mission. Right Now.
“ g A ppace2-oF?7

 
  

Copies of the documents to be forwarded to the separation 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, and how your service will be characterized. If
you are discharged, you will be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force.

3. You have the right to consult counsel. Military legal counsel has heen

ed to assist you. I have made an appointment for you to consul
, at the Area Defense Counsel, Bldg 36, on : mos 7 at

‘-. You may consult civilian counsel at your own expense.

4. You have the right to submit statements. Any at de you want the

separation authority to consider mist reach me by » unless you
request and receive an extension for good cause shown. I will send them to
the separation authority.

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

6. You have been scheduled for a medical examination. You must report to the
USAF Hospital, RAF Upper Heyford, Special Testing Section at 730 hra

on LE Kip x7] for the examination.

d acknowledgement and return it to me immediately.

  

{ Atch
Receipt of Ltr of
Notification