7 AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD

 

NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL)

GRADE AFSN/SSAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TYPE

GEN X PERSONAL APPEARANCE RECORD REVIEW

COUNSEL. ay NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL

YES NO

xX
eat OTE OFTHE BOARD =
MEMBERS SITTING ‘HON | GEN «(| UOTHC” | OTHER DENY

iy x*

Pe x*

PF x

ns x*

FP xX*

 

ISSUES INDEX NUMBER

A97.36, A92.22 A67.10

=f 2] EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD =

 

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD

 

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE

 

LETTER OF NOTIFICATION

 

HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER

21 OCT 03 FD2001-0267

 

BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE

Blo! wells

 

COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD

 

ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

 

 

 

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

 

APPLICANT’S ISSUE AND THE BOARD'S DECISIONAL RATIO)

 
  

ARE DISCUSSED ON THE ATTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE!

 

REMARKS
*Change Reason and Authority to Secretarial Authority. (SPD: JFF)
Case heard at the Air Reserve Personnel Center, Denver, CO.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board.

(DD Form 149 submitted.)

 

SIGNATURE OF BOARD PRESIDENT

 

_ DATE: 21 OCT 03 :

 

 

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 | ¢p 901-9967

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge Review Board (DRB), without counsel at the Air
Reserve Personnel Center, Denver, CO, on October 21, 2003. The following type of witness also testified
on the applicant’s behalf: SSgt RPR, USAF (a friend and former co-worker).

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing:

Exhibit 5: Character Reference Letter fromg i BES USAF, dated 17 October 2003

Exbibit 6: Utility Trailer ’ Manufacturing Company (employer) Character Reference Letter signed by #@&
. ne ees: dated 19 August 2003

The attached brief contains the available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the
discharge.

FINDINGS: The Board grants the requested relief.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant substantiates an
impropriety that would justify a change of discharge. However, based upon the record and evidence
provided by applicant, the Board finds the applicant’s reason and authority for discharge inequitable.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for minor disciplinary infractions. The records indicated the applicant
received two Articles 15, one for disrespect to a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO) and failing to
obey a lawful order, the other for being drunk and disorderly and assaulting another person, resulting in
injury. At the time of the discharge, member waived his right to consult counsel and to submit matters in
his own behalf. Applicant contends the two incidents of misconduct were isolated and uncharacteristic of
his otherwise satisfactory service. Additionally applicant contends these two incidents were predicated by a
period of stress related to personal problems for which he felt the Air Force provided inadequate assistance.
The DRB opined that through the unit’s administrative actions, the applicant had the opportunity to change
his negative behavior, and concluded the misconduct was a significant departure from conduct expected of
all military members. And, while the Board did not condone member’s misconduct, after a thorough review
of the record and information submitted by applicant, the Board felt there was sufficient mitigation and
extenuation to substantiate an upgrade of the discharge and to change the reason for the discharge.
Specifically, the Board found the characterization was too harsh.

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.

However, in view of the foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of
applicant’s service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge, and the reason for discharge is
more accurately described as Secretarial Authority. The applicant’s characterization of service and reason
and authority for discharge should be changed to Honorable and Secretarial Authority under the provisions

of Title 10, U.S.C. 1553.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
FD2001-0267
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(Former A1C)

 

1. MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 98/08/01 UP AFI 36-
3208, para 5.49 (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions). Appeals for

Honorable Disch.
2. BACKGROUND:

; a. DOB: 75/04/04. Enlmt Age: 19 0/12. Disch Age: 23 3/12. Educ:HS DIPL.
AFQT: N/A. A-89, E-51, G-66, M-50. PAFSC: 1C531C - Aerospace Control &

Warning System Apprentice. DAS: 97/02/08.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 94/04/16 - 94/10/11 (5 months 26 days) (Inactive).

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:

a. Enld as AB 94/10/12 for 4 yrs. Extended 97/06/30 for 4
months (Cancelled). Svd: 3 Yrs 9 Mo 20 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: A1C - 98/07/14 (Article 15, 98/04/14)
SrA - 97/10/12
AlC - (EPR Indicates): 94/10/12-97/01/15
AMN - (EPR Indicates): 94/10/12-97/01/15

c. Time Lost: none.

d. Art 15’s: (1) 98/04/14, Keflavik NAS, Iceland - Article 91. You did,
at Naval Air Station Keflavik,Iceland, on or about 27 Jun
98, treat with disrespectful language toward MSgt ------- ,

a noncommissioned officer, then known by you to be a
noncommissioned officer, who was then in the execution of
his office, by saying to him, "Fuck this, this is bullshit,
I'm not showing you my ID card--I'm just sitting here."
"Fuck this. I'm not showing you shit." or words to that
effect. Article 92. You, having knowledge of a lawful
order issued by MSgt ------- to show him your ID card, an
order which it was you duty to obey, did at Naval Air
Station Keflavik, Iceland, on or about 27 Jun 98, fail to
obey the same by wrongfully refusing to give him your ID
Card. Rdn to Alc. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

(2) 98/03/06, Keflavik NAS, Iceland - Article 128. You did,
at Naval Air Station, Keflavik, Iceland, on or about 14 Feb
98, commit an assault upon ------- by striking him in the
face with your elbow and did thereby inflict grevious
bodily harm upon him, to wit: a broken nose. Article 134.
You were, at Naval Air Station, Keflavik, Iceland, on or
FD2001-0267

 

about 14 Feb 98, drunk and disorderly, which conduct was of
a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. Rdn to
AlC (suspended until 5 Sep 98) forfeiture of $590.00 pay
per month for two months and 30 days extra duty.
(Appeal/Denied) (No mitigation)

e. Additional: none.
£. CM: none.

g. Record of SV: 94/10/12 - 97/01/15 Hill AFB 4 (HAF Dir)
97/01/16 - 98/01/15 Keflavik AS 4 (Annual)

(Discharged from Keflavik NAS)
h. Awards & Decs: AFTR, NDSM, AFEM, AFOUA, AFGCM.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (4) Yrs (3) Mos (16) Das
TAMS: (3) Yrs (9) Mos (20) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appln (DD Fm 293) dtd 01/08/12.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

Issue 1: I accept responsibility for my past poor decisions. Use letter of
request, document one.

Issue 2: I am striving to be a better citizen, husband, and father. Use
letters of support, documents two, three, and four.

ATCH
1. Applicant's Letter to Board.
2. Four Letters of Support.

01/10/03/ia
IEEE EO

FD2001-0267

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

HEADQUARTERS 85TH GROUP (ACC)
APO AE 09725-2055

 

28 July 1998

MEMORANDUM FOR CC

FROM: JA

 

SUBJECT: gal Review - Administrative Discharge of Giieeieiadbiigliaintgs

 

1. The record in this case is legally sufficient to justify an administrative discharge for
misconduct (minor disciplinary infractions) under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, para 5.49. The
respondent has been afforded all rights and privileges in accordance with pertinent laws and

regulations.

 

ES eees: is 23 years old and enlisted in the Air Force on 12 Oct 94 for a term of four
years. His DEROS is 11 Oct 98.

3. As evidence supporting this action, his squadron commander cites the reasons listed i in the

Notification Memorandum, paragraph 2 (see case file). Since Mar 98,0
committed infractions worthy of administrative discharge. These include:

 

a. On or about 27 Jun 98, he was disrespectful toward a superior noncommissioned officer
and failed to obey the NCOs lawful order. For these actions, . MA received nonjudicial
punishment (Article 15) action, dated 14 Jul 98.

 

b. On or about 14 Feb 98, he assaulted another individual (breaking the person’s nose) and —
was drunk and disorderly on station. As a result, he received nonjudicial punishment (Article 15)

action, dated 6 Mar 98.

 

4. Please note, in paragraph (1) of a gi forwarding memorandum, he mentions two
Letters of Reprimand and one Letter of Counseling for unsatisfactory progress in the weight
management program (WMP). Failure to progress in the WMP is not misconduct; it cannot be
used in deciding whether or not to discharge, the characterization of discharge, nor granting or
denying P&R. It is included merely as other derogatory data, as required by the regulation.

5, Mii yas afforded the opportunity to consult with the Lakenheath AB Area Defense
Counsel concerning this action and voluntarily decided not to consult. His statement

- unequivocally states, in the strongest terms, that he did not wish to consult with counsel on this
matter. He also elected not to submit matters on his own behalf.
FD2001-0267

 

6. The squadron has demonstrated support for #jiid hrough rehabilitative efforts and
opportunities... The first of the two Article 15s given had punishment including a suspended
reduction in rank for six months. The squadron commander and first sergeant took all

appropriate actions in this case. Despite these efforts, MOMEBB, simply has failed to meet the
standards for continuous service in the military.

7. The respondent’s Article {5s are evidence of a pattern of misconduct, specifically, minor
disciplinary infractions. The seriousness of the offenses and the short period of time in between

_ events clearly establishes 9a as a candidate for administrative separation. The
appropriate action at this point in time, under the AFI, is to discharge this individual.

8. AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.49, says the SPCM authority personally approves or disapproves
discharges under this provision. Paragraphs 1.18.1 and 5.48.4 say an honorable discharge is
appropriate if the quality of an airman’s service has generally met Air Force standards of
acceptable conduct and performance of duty, or when his service is otherwise so meritorious that
any other characterization would be clearly inappropriate (in which case the general court-martial
convening authority must approve the characterization). Para 1.18.2 says a general discharge is
appropriate if an airman’s service has been honest and faithful, but significant negative aspects of
his conduct or duty performance outweigh positive aspects of his military record. Discharges for

minor disciplinary infractions are ordinarily characterized as general. PERRY service
meets the latter test and warrants a general discharge.

9. If you decide to discharge the respondent, you may direct conditional suspension of his
discharge pending successful completion of probation and rehabilitation (P&R), under Chapter 7,
AFI 36-3208. P&R is appropriate for members who have demonstrated a-potential to serve satis-
factorily, have the capacity to be rehabilitated, and whose retention on active duty is consistent
with good order and discipline. I do not recommend the respondent be offered P&R. The efforts
of the unit demonstrate this airman is simply unable to progress and meet Air Force standards of

performance.

10. Options. You may:

a. Discharge ee vith a general, under honorable conditions discharge, with or
without P&R.

b. Recommend to 8 AF/CC that eee receive an honorable discharge, with or without
P&R.

c. Convene a discharge board and refer this case to it if you feel an under other than
honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge is warranted.

d. Retain
NN  _ ___’_ZC«é‘“‘(“‘“‘~é<‘ CT

FD2001-0267

‘

 

10. Recommendation. : fi squadron commander recommends discharge with a
service characterization of general, ‘under honorable conditions, without P&R. I concur. If you
accept this recommendation, you may use the attached action memorandum to direct the
airman’s discharge.

   

BTEnrr # USAF
Staff Judge Advocate

Attachments:
1. Proposed Action Memorandum

2. Case File
FD2001-0267

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE

932D AIR CONTROL SQUADRON (ACC)
APO AE 09725-2055

 

27 July 1998

  

MEMORANDUM FO Reggae
FROM: CC
SUBJECT: Notification Memorandum

1. lam recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for minor disciplinary —
infractions. The authority for this action is AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.49. If
my recommendation is approved, your service will be characterized as honorable or general. I
am recommending that your service be characterized as general!

2. My reasons for this action are:

a. On or about 27 Jun 98, you treated with disrespectful language a noncommissioned officer
who was in the execution of his office and failed to obey a lawful order issued by the same
noncommissioned officer. For this, you received nonjudicial punishment (Article 15) action,
dated 14 Jul 98.

b. On or about 14 Feb 98, you assaulted an individual, inflicting grievous bodily harm, and
were drunk and disorderly. As a result, you received nonjudicial punishment (Article 15) action,

dated 6 Mar 98.

3. 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. If you are
discharged, you will be ineligible for reenlistment in the Air Force. Any special pay, bonus, or
education assistance funds may be subject to recoupment.

4. You have the right to consult counsel. Military legal counsel has been obtained to assist you.
I] have made an appointment for you to consult with the Area Defense Counsel, RAF Lakenheath,
on 28 July 1998, at 0930 . In addition to military counsel, you have the right to

employ civilian counsel at your own expense.

 

5. You have the right to submit statement in your own behalf. Any statements you want the
separation authority to consider must reach me by (915, 20 July 1998, unless you request
and receive an extension for good cause shown. I will send them to the separation authority.
FD2001-0267

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

7. You have been scheduled for a medical examination. You must report to the medical facility

at 0930 _,on 21 _ July 1998.

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 at the Base Legal Office.

 

Attachments:
1. Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings, 14 Jul 98,
2. Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings, 6 Mar 98

3. Two EPRs (Thru Dates: 15 Jan 98, 15 Jan 97)
4. Receipt of Notification Memorandum