I 

i 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

IITIAL) 

- 

MEMBER SITTING 

I  ISSUES  A94.05 

1 
2 
3 
4 

I 

ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 
APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 

-  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION- 
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 
COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD 
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 
I  TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

HEARING DATE 

20 Oct 2005 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-2004-00152 

Case heard at Washington, D.C. 

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

Names and votes will be made available to the applicant at the applicant's request. 

TO: 

I 

SAFIMRBR 
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 7815011742 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 
AIR FORCE DISCIIARCE REVIEW BOARD 
1535 COMMAND DR,  EE WING, 3RD FLOOR 
ANDREWS AFB, MD 207627002 

I 
(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will be used 

I 

I 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-2004-00152 

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

The  applicant  appeared  and  testified  before  the  Discharge  Review  Board  (DRB),  without  counse 
Andrews AFB  on  20  Oct  2005.  The  following witness  also testified  on  the  applicant's  behalf:  M 
applicant's mother. 

Y 

The following additional exhibits were submitted at the hearing: 

Exhibit # 5: Four Character reference letters 

I The attached brief contains available pertinent data on the applicant and the factors leading to the discharge.  I 
I 
I 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 that would justify a change of discharge. 

-- 

ISSUE 1:  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because he was denied his Personnel Information 
File  and  the  fact  that  he  requested an  extension due  to  his  medical  profile.  The  records  indicated the 
applicant received two Article  15s for failure to go, three Letters of Reprimand for being late for duty, and 
one Letter of Counseling for dereliction of duty.  Applicant's first issue is without merit. The applicant had 
received  copies of the  Letters of  Counseling/Reprimand, and copies of the  Article  15s, which  spelled out 
exactly what the  misconduct was  for.  Also  in the  Commander's  Notification Memorandum, paragraph  2 
1  specifically spells out the reasons for the discharge and that same Notification Memorandum, in paragraph 5, 
informs the applicant that he has three duty days to respond unless he requests and receives an extension for 
good  cause.  The  Commander  did  not  find  the  applicant's  request  fit  this  requirement  and  denied  the 
extension.  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. 

ISSUES 2,3, and 6 all relate to the applicants medical problems and will be answered together.  Applicant 
states that his discharge was inequitable due to his medical profile  and the medications he was taken were 
not considered.  These issues are without merit.  The DRB noticed that the applicant was on a medical 
profile twice.  Once in October 2001 for 30 days, and again in December 2001 until Jan 2002 for another 30 
days.  These problems did not keep the applicant from going to work.  He was on light duty but was still 

ed to c

o m e ~ n

t

i

r

n

e

-

 

ISSUE 4:  Applicant states the discharge was inequitable due to being singled out among others who were in 
the wrong.  This issue is without merit.  You cannot compare punishment that is doled out to one person 
against another.  The applicant had prior misconduct and was dealt with more severely than the individual he 
was with, who most likely did not have prior incidents of misconduct. 

ISSUE 5: Applicant believes his discharge was inequitable because he called into his shop and notified 
them that he was going to be late.  This issue is also without merit.  In his 15 Jan 04 response to his 
notification of proposed administrative discharge, he stated that there were family issues going on at the time 
and he forgot about the appointment due to those issues being on his mind.  However, when the applicant 
submitted this application for upgrade, he states that he went to the airport to pick up another airman before 

his shift was to start and encountered heavy traffic on his return.  Then, in another memorandum, he states 
that he was working the early morning shift and was not called back to his shop and briefed that he had an 
appointment.  Although the appointment was scheduled a month in advance. 

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 f?  Cannon AFB, NM  on 29 Jan 04 
UP AFI 36-3208, para 5.50.2 (Pattern of-Misconduct -  Conduct Prejudicial to Good 
Order and Discipline).  Appeals for Honorable Discharge. 
2 .  BACKGROUND : 

a. DOB: 4 Jan 82.  Enlmt Age: 18 6/12.  Disch Age: 22 0/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 

AFQT: N/A.  A-74,  E-43,  G-33,  M-41. PAFSC: 33251 -  Pavements &  Construction 
Equipment Journeyman. DAS: 11 Jul 01. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 2 Aug 00 -  17 Oct 00 (2 months 16 days)(Inactive). 

SERVICE  UNDER  REVIEW: 

a.  Enlisted as AB  18 Oct 00 for 6 yrs. Svd: 3 Yrs 3 Mo 12 Das, all AMS. 

- 

b.  Grade Status:  A1C -  30 Dec 03 (Article 15, 30 Dec 03) 

SRA -  01 Apr 03 
A1C -  20 Apr 01 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 
d.  Art 15's:  (1) 30 Dec 03, Cannon AFB, NM  -  Article 86.  You did, on or 

aEout 2 Dec 03, without authority, fail to go at the 
time prescribed to your appointed place of duty. 
Reduction to A1C  (reduction below A1C suspended), 30 
days extra duty and a reprimand. (Appeal/Denied) (No 
mitigation) 

(2) 30 Oct 02, Cannon AFB, NM  -  Article 86.  You, did, on 

or about 19 Oct 02, without authority, fail to go at the 
time prescribed to your appointed place of duty. 
Suspended reduction to Airman, and 30 days correctional 
custody  (deferred until 11 Nov 02) .  (~ppeal/Denied) (No 
mitigation) 

e.  Additional: LOCI 21 MAY 02 -  Dereliction of duty. 
LOR, 15 JAN 02 -  Late for formation. 
LOR, 25 OCT 01 -  Late for duty. 
LOR, 24 OCT 01 -  Late for duty. 

f.  CM:  None. 

g.  Record of SV: 18 Oct 00 -  17 Jun 02  Cannon AFB  3  (Initial) 

F D 2 0 0 4 - 0 0 1 5 2  

18 Jun 02 -  17 Jun 03  Cannon AFB  2  (Annual ) REF 

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

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS:  (3) Yrs  (5) Mos  (28) Das 
TAMS:  (3) Yrs  (3) Mos  (12) Das 

4.  BASIS ADVANCED FOR  REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 7 Apr 04. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable) 

ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF. 

ATCH 
1. Applicant's Issues with Attachments. 

*.=.. 
* .. 
. 

. 

:@ 

F p w d a o / s z .  

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS 27th FIGHTER WING (ACC) 

CANNON AIR FORCE BASE NEW MEXICO 

. .-.,, 
.. .... 

. . 

MEMORANDUM FOR A1 

7 CES 

FROM:  27 CESICC 

SUBJECT:  Notification Memorandum 

12  Jan  04 

1.  I am recommending your discharge fiom the United States Air Force for misconduct, 
specifically, a pattern of misconduct prejudicial to good order and discipline.  The authority for 
this action is AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.50.2.  If my recommendation is 
approved, your service will be characterized as honorable or general.  I am recommending that 
your service be chardterized as general. 

2TMyreasons for this action are: 

a.  On or about 24 Oct 01, you reported late for duty the third consecutive time after being told by 
the shop NCOIC and another NCO that it will not happen again, as evidenced by a Letter of 
Reprimand, dated 24 Oct 01. (Atch a) 

b.  On or about 25 Oct 01, you reported late for duty, as evidenced by a Letter of Reprimand, 
dated 25 Oct 01. (Atch b) 

c.  On or about 12 JM  02, you reported to a mandatory Prime Beef formation 10 minutes late,  as 
evidenced by a Letter of Reprimand, dated 15 Jan 02. (Atch c) 

d.  On or about 20 May 02, fiom  approximately 2000 hrs until 2300 hrs, you were seen playing a 
hand held video game while on sweeper duty.  You were also observed using your personal cell 
phone while on duty, as evidenced by a Letter of Counseling, dated 21 May 02. (Atch d) 

e.  On or about 19 Oct 02, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, 
as evidenced by an Article 15 action, dated 30 Oct 02. (Atch e) 

p

-

-

,

'

 
P 
1. 
as evidenced by an Article 15 action, dated 30 Dec 03. (Atch f) 

O J ,  -i -
-

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 and, if you are 
discharged, how your service will be characterized.  If you are discharged, you will be ineligible 
for reenlistment in the Air Force, and any special pay, bonuses, or education assistance funds 
may be subject to recoupment. 

, 

t counsel.  Military legal counsel has been obtained to assist you. 

will be made for you to consult with a military legal counsel fiom the Cannon 
se Counsel's Office at building 600, ext. 2915.  You may consult civilian 

. .%".~..  . >  ,: 
- >.  >  .. .  .. . 
. .  
. . 

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 3 duty days fiom today unless you request 
and receive an extension for good cause shown.  I will send them to the separation authority. 

6.  If you fail to consult c o k e 1  or to submit statements on your own behalf, your failure will 
constitute a waiver of your right to do so. 

7.  You will complete a medical examination at the 27th Medical Group on 
1445 

hours. 

13  Jan 04 at 

8.  Any personal infoimafion you M s h  in rebuttal is covered by the Privacy Act of 1974. A 
copy of AFI 36-3208 is available for y o u  use in your unit orderly room, or you may download a 
copy fiom http://afpubs.hq.af.mil/. 

Attachments: 
a.  Letter of Reprimand, dated 24 Oct 0 1 
b.  Letter of Reprimand, dated 25 Oct 01 
c.  Letter of Reprimand, dated 15 Jan 02 
d.  Letter of Counseling, dated 21 May 02 
e.  Article 15 action, dated 30 Oct 02 
f  Article 15 action, dated 30 Dec 03 

I