I 
1  NAME OF SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST M1DDI.E INITIAI,) 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

GRADE 

AMN 

I 

I 

RECORDREVIEW 

 TYPE  GEN 

I 

mUNSEL 

I 

I 

PERSONAL APPEARAIUCE 

I

X

 

, 

NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANEATION 

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION  OF ('OUNSLL 

YES 

No 
X 

I 

I 

ISSUES  A93.23 

MEMBER SITTING 

-w-w* 

-- 
HON  7  (;EN 

.. --  -2 

VOTE OF THE BOARD 

I  UOTIIC  OTHER 1 

 DEN^ 

I 

I 
EXIIIBITS SUBMIWID TO THE BOARD 

I 

I 

1 
2 
3 
4 

ORDER APPOTNTTNG THE BOARD 
APPLICATION  FOR  REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 
LETTER OF NO'l.lt.IUA'TION 
BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FII,k, 
COUNSF1,'S  RF.l.EASE, I O  I HE, BOARD 
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTEL) A 1'  I  I M t  01: 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 
I  TAPE RECOR[)INC; OF PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

HEARING  DATE 

CASE NUMBER 

28 Jul2006 
APPLICANT'S ISSI'E AND THE BOARD 5 DECISIONAL RAfiONAl  4W DISCL'SSED ON TXE 4TTACHED AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD VtCISlON U. R4TIOVALE 

FD-2005-00413 

L 

I 

I 

1  Case heard in 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 

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

*Reason and Authority 

1 
1  " 

I  ~ n .  

, 

, ,  

,- 

- -. A  a  - 

Muonsiw cwr 

SAFJMRBR 
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 
RANDO1,PH  AFB, TX 78150-4742 

- 

LA  -. -  A- 

A 

DATE:  7/31/2006 

--.- 

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE:  PKRSONNEI, COllNClL 
A1H  FORCE DISCHARGE HEVIEH  BOARD 
1135 COM\l.\SD  DR. EE HINC. 3RD FLOOR 
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002 

I  FIIOM: 

I 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will be used 

1 

1 

I 

1 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

v 

CASE NIJMBER 

FD-2005-00413 

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable and to change the reason and 
authority for the discharge. 

The applicant was offered a personal appearance before the Discharge Review Board (DRB) 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 
inequity or impropriety that would justify  a change of discharge. 

ISSUE: 

Issue 1.  Applicant contends discharge was inequitable because his reason for discharge should have been 
due to mental health.  The records indicated the applicant received an Article  15, a Vacation, two Letters of 
Reprimand and five Records of Jildividual Counseling for misconduct.  The Article  15 and Vacation were as 
a result of neglect to government quarters with damage by the applicant in the amount of $275 1.47 and 
failure to go to appoiiited place of duty.  He was punished with a reduction to airman,  10 days of extra duty 
and a reprimand.  He received two Letters of Reprimand for failure to go, sleeping on the job, and failure to 
report to work on time.  He also received Records of Individual Counseling for failure to obey orders, failure 
to meet training requirements,  late reporting to work and failure of his CDC End of Course Pre-test.  The 
DRB opined that although the applicant was being treated by mental health, it did not impair his ability to 
know right from wrong or ability to choose the right.  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. 

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 thc 
discharge authority and that the applicant was provided fill1 administrative due process. 

In view of the foregoiiig 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 AMN)  (HGH AlC) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd  a GEN Disch fr USAF Nellis AFB, NV on 7 Apr 
05 UP AFI  36-3208, para 5.49  (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary  infraction^). 
Appeals  for Honorable Discharge and to Change the Reason and Authority  for 
Discharge. 

2 .  BACKGROUND : 

a. DOB: 11 Mar 78.  Enlmt Age: 24 4/12.  Disch Age: 27 0/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 
AFQT: N/A.  A-94,  E-93,  G-99,  M-97.  PAFSC: 2A031A -  Avionics Test Station and 
Components, Avionics System F-15 Apprentice. DAS: 14 Nov 03. 

b.  Prior Sv:  (1) AFRes 26 Jul 02 -  27 Jan 03  (6 mos 2 das) (Inactive). 

3.  SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Enlisted as AB 28 Jan 03 for 6 years. Svd: 2 Yrs 2 Mo 10 Das, all AMS. 

b.  Grade Status:  Amn -  18 Feb 05  (Vacation, 15 Mar 05) 

A1C -  14 Mar 03 

c.  Time Lost:  None, 

d.  Art 15's:  (1) 15 Mar 05, Vacation, Nellis AFB, NV -  Article  86.  You 
did, on or about 8 Mar 05, without authority, failed to 
go at the time prescribed to your appointed place of 
duty, to wit: Building #423.  Reduced to Amn.  (No 
appeal) (No mitigation) 

(2) 18 Feb 05, Nellis AFB, NV -  Article  108.  You, did, on 

or about 12 Jan 05, without proper authority, through 
neglect suffer government quarters, military property of 
the United States, to be damaged by you, the amount of 
the said damage being in the sum of $2,751.47. 
Suspended reduction to Amn.  Ten days extra duty and 
Reprimand.  (No appeal)  (No mitigation) 

e.  Additional: RIC, 8 MAR  05 -  Failure to obey orders. 

RIC, 8 MAR  05 -  Failure to meet training requirements. 
LOR, 28 JAN 05 -  Failure to go and sleeping on duty. 
LOR, 1 DEC 04 -  Failure to go. 
RIC, 22 OCT 04 -  Late for work. 
RIC, 25 AUG 04 -  Tardy for duty. 
RIC, 23 JUL 04 -  Failure of CDC EOC Pre-test. 

f.  CM:  None. 

g.  Record of SV: 28 Jan 03 -  27 Sep 04  Nellis AFB  4  (Initial) 

28 Sep 04 -  15 Mar  05  Nellis AFB  2 

(CMDR D1R)REF 

h.  Awards  &  Decs:  AFOUA, NDSM, AFTR, GWOTSM. 

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS:  (02) Yrs  (08) Mos  (12) Das 
TAMS:  (02) Y ~ s  (02) MOS  (10) Das 

4 .   BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Em 293) dtd 26 Oct 05. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable and Change the Reason and Authority for 

Discharge) 

Issue 1:  I belive  (sic) my discharge should be upgraded because the reason 

for discharge was caused by my mental health.  I was discharged for being late 
repeatedly, which my mental health records show was caused by my sleep problems, 
which I was being treated for.  Additionaly,  (sic) the first page of the packet 
of mental health records shows I was going to be medicaly  (sic) discharged, but 
due to another tardy, was discharged before that for reasons other than my 
mental health.  I was seeking treatment and I am still being treated for the 
same problems.  I would like to have my discharge upgraded for those reasons. 
Thank you, Adam Morse. 

ATCH 
1.  Medical Records. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

57TH COMPONENT MAINTENANCE SQUADRON 

NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, NEVADA 89191 

FROM:  57 CMSICC 

SUBJECT:  Notification Memorandum --Board Hearing 

1.  I am recommending your discharge from the United States Air Force for Misconduct: Minor 
Disciplinary Infractions.  The authority for this action is AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and 
Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, paragraph 5.49,  Copies of 
the documents to be forwarded to the separation authority to support this recommendation are 
attached. 

2.  My reason far this action is: 

a.  On 22 Jul04, you scored an average of 70% on your EOC pretest which was 

unacceptable according to shop directives.  For your actions, you received a Record of Individual 
Counseling (ROIC) dated 23 Jul04; and 

b.  On 24 Aug 04,  you failed to go at the time prescribed to your place of duty.  For your 

actions, you received an ROIC dated 25 Aug 04; and 

c.  On 22 Oct 04, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your place of duty.  For yaw 

actions, you received an ROTC dated 22 Oct 04;  and 

d.  On or about 1 Dec 04, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your place of duty.  For 

your actions, you received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated 1 Dec 04; and 

e.  On 27 Jan 05, you failed to go at the time prescribed to your place of duty.  For your 

actions, you received an LOR dated 28 Jan 05;  and 

f.  Between 20 Feb 05 and 3 Mar 05, you failed to complete your CDC unit review 

exercises.  For your actions, you received an ROIC dated 8 Mar 05; and 

g.  On 7 Mar 05, you failed to obey the orders of an noncommissioned officer.  For your 

actions, you received an ROIC dated 8 Mar 05; and 

h.  You did, at or near Nellis AFB, NV, on or about 12 Jan 05, with out proper authority, 
through neglect suffer government quarters, military property of the Untied States, to be damaged 
by you, the amount of the said damage being in the sum of $2,75  1.47.  For your actions, you were 
punished under Article IS, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 18 Feb 05 consisting of a 
suspended reduction to the grade of Airman, ten days extra duty, a reprimand, and an Unfavorable 
Information File (UIF) was established; and 

i.  You did, at or near Nellis AFB, NV, on or about 8 Mar 05, without authority, fail to go at 
the time prescribed to your appointed place of duty, to wit:  Building #423.  For your actions, your 
suspended punishment of reduction to the grade of Airman was vacated on  15 Mar 05. 

3.  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 Captain; - - -_ - - -. :or Copt I ------- : at Bldg 625, on 
3 O r - . c / r   UT,at  o ~ O O  

hours.  You may consult civilian counsel at your own expense. 

..-..-..- 

-..-..-. 

4.  You  have the right to submit statements in your own behalf.  You have three (3) duty days 
from the dateltime served to submit statements in your behalf.  Any statements you want the 
separation authority to consider must reach me by  1 4 ~  
at  / C a  houn unless you 
request and receive an extension for good cause shown.  I will send them to the separation 
authority. 

O r  

5.  In the event the commander exercising special court-martial jurisdiction or a higher authority 
approves your discharge, separations will out-process you.  Your initial separations briefing is 
scheduled for .J8 && at  11- 

hrs. 

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 
222 Las Vegas Blvd  on 

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 your unit orderly room. 

.-I ,' ,\s-.  .*p*,rr.r.yr 

-*----I 

Commander 

w r r r  

--------------- 

Attachments: 
1.  Receipt of Notification Memorandum 
2.  ROTC, dated 23 Jul04 
3.  ROIC, dated 25 Aug 04 
4,  ROIC, dated 22 Oct 04 
5.  LOR, dated 1 Dec 04 
6.  LOR, dated 28 Jan 05 
7.  ROIC, dated 8 Mar 05 
8,  ROIC, dated 8 Mar 05 
9.  Article 15, dated 18 Feb 05 
1 0.  Vacation Action, dated  15 Mar 05 

Y 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS AIR WARFARE CENTER (ACC) 

NELLIS AIR FORCE BASE, NEVADA 

a 

MEMORANDUM FOR 57 WGICC 

FROM:  AWFCIJA 

' 57 CMS 
.......................... 

Review of Administrative Discharge Proceedings Under AFI 36-3208, Paragraph 

.............................. 
SUBJECT: ,--- Legal 
5.49 - A m  i --- --- --- --- --- -- --- --- --- --- --- --#, 
- 
1.  Introduction:  On 29 Mar 05, the , - - - - - -  
1,  for minor disciplinary infractions 
action against the respondent, h-ln l- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -, 
under AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrutive Separation 
of Airmen, paragraph 5.49.  The commander recommended a general service characterization and no 
further opportunity for probation and rehabilitation (P&R).  We concur and have determined that the 
discharge package is legally sufficient and supports the commander's recommendations.  The case is 
being processed by notification procedure.  As the separation authority, you have the following 
alternatives: 

Component 

Maintenance Squadron 

Commander initiated discharge 

a.  Direct the respondent be retained; 

b.  Direct the respondent be discharged with a general service characterization, with or 

without P&R; 

c,  Recommend to the General Court-Martial Convening Authority that the respondent receive 

an honorable service characterization, with or without P&R; or 

d.  Direct reinitiation of this case IAW AFI 36-3208, Chapter 6, Section C, Board Hearing or 
Waiver, if you believe an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) service characterization is 
warranted. 

2.  Facts:  A preponderance of the evidence establishes that the following incidents occurred during 
the respondent's  current enlistment: 
-------- 
[ ------- i scored an average of 70% on his EOC pretest which was 
unacceptable according to shop directives.  For his actions, he received a Record of Individual 
Counseling (ROIC) dated 23 Jul04; and 

a.  On 22 Jul04, ~ m n  

b.  On 24 Aug 04, Amn :::::::-:failed 

to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty.  For his 

actions, he received an ROIC dated 25 Aug 04; and 

c.  On 22 Oct 04, Arnn 1 ------- r  failed to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty.  For his 

, - - - - - - - I  

actions, he received an ROIC dated 22 Oct 04; and 

d.  On or about 1 Dec 04, Amn: L..  -. .-.I :failed to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty, 

For his actions, he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated 1 Dec 04; and 

.-..- "., 

e.  On 27 Jan 05, Amn l . . -. . . .! failed to go at the time prescribed to his place of duty.  For his 

actions, he received an LOR dated 28 Jan 05; and 

f.  Between 20 Feb 05 and 3 Mar 05, A m !  - - - - - - - - a  

ifailed to complete his CDC unit review 

exercises.  For his actions, he received an ROIC dated 8 Mar 05; and 

..-.-..- 

-------- 

-------- 

g.  On 7 Mar 05, Amn! 

! failed to obey the orders of an noncommissioned officer.  For 

his actions, he received an ~ d l l ~ ~ i i k d  

8 Mar 05; and 

-------- 

h.  Amni _ -. -. . - .I !did, at or near Nellis AFB, NV, on or about 12 Jan 05, without proper 

authority, through neglect suffer government quarters, military property of the Untied States, to be 
damaged, the amount of the said damage being in the sum of $2,75 1.47.  For his actions, he was 
punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on 18 Feb 05 consisting of a 
suspended reduction to the grade of Airman, ten days extra duty, a reprimand, and an Unfavorable 
Information File (UIF) was established; and 

i.  Amn Morse did, at or near Nellis AFB, NV, on or about 8 Mar 05, without authority, fail to 

go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty, to wit:  Building #423.  For his actions, his 
suspended punishment of reduction to the grade of Airman was vacated on 15 Mar 05. 

3.  Other Factors:  The respondent is a 27-year old Airman First Class with over 1 year and 1 month 
of active military service.  He is entitled to wear the Global War on Terrorism Service Ribbon, 
National Defense Service Medal, AF Outstanding Unit Award, and the AF Training Ribbon.  His test 
scores are:  Admin-94, Elect-93, Gen-99, and Mech-97.  The respondent waived his right to consult 
with military legal counsel and waived his right to submit a statement for your consideration. 

4.  Errors and Irrenularities:  The words "Board Hearing" should not have been included in the 
Notification Memorandum dated 29 Mar 05.  Though the words "Board Hearing" were included in 
the memorandum, the words do not affect the substantive or procedural rights of the respondent. 
There are no errors or irregularities prejudicial to the substantive rights of the respondent. 

5.  Authority:  AFI 36-3208 regulates the administrative discharge of Airmen and provides the 
following guidance relevant to this file: 

a.  The file has been prepared in substantial compliance with AFT  36-3208 and is legally 

sufficient. 

b.  A member is subject to discharge for minor disciplinary infractions such as failing to 

comply with nonpunitive regulations or committing minor offenses under the UCMJ.  Infractions of 
this type normally result, as a rule, in formal or informal counseling, LORs, or Article 15 nonjudicial 
punishments. 

c.  A member subject to discharge may have his or her service characterized as honorable, 
under honorable conditions (general), or as under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC).  The 
service of a member discharged for misconduct may be characterized as honorable only if the 
member's record has been so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly 
inappropriate.  A general characterization is warranted when the negative aspects of an Airman's 
conduct or performance outweigh other aspects of the Airman's  military record.  A member's service 

may be characterized as UOTHC only if the respondent is given an opportunity for a hearing by an 
administrative discharge board.  A UOTHC may be appropriate when separation is based on a pattern 
of behavior that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of an Airman. 

d.  The Air Force program of P&R for Airmen subject to administrative discharge gives 

Airmen -the opportunity to stay in the Air Force and get help so that they may be able to serve until 
their expiration of term of service (ETS). The program includes suspension of approved discharges 
for specific periods of P&R and lengthy service probation.  It is based on the principle of conditional 
suspension of administrative discharge for cause in deserving cases.  Under the program, execution of 
the approved discharge for cause is conditionally suspended.  This gives Airmen a chance to show 
that they are able to meet Air Force standards. 

6.  Analysis: 

-..-..-.. 

a.  Amn: --------. 

:has committed --------- 

numerous offenses which form the legal basis for discharge for 

minor disciplinary infractions. Amri --------- !should be discharged with a general service 
characterization.  While the respondent could receive a UOTHC discharge for minor disciplinary 
infractions, these minor disciplinary infractions are not so egregious as to require a UOTHC 
discharge. 

b.  The respondent's misconduct is clearly evident in his military record.  The respondent has 

been given numerous opportunities to correct his behavior, yet he continues to disregard Air Force 
standards.  Therefore, an honorable service characterization is inappropriate.  Amn Morse's actions 
and his disregard of military standards substantially outweigh any positive aspects of his military 
service record.  He has been reprimanded and punished under Article 15, UCMJ, all with negative 
results.  A general discharge under paragraph 5.49 is warranted-gdgppropriate in this particular 
case.  No further opportunities should be given.  While Amn! 
good order and discipline, the misconduct is not of such a nat'iiedii&ing  of a UOTHC 
characterization. 

:infractions are prejudicial to 

c.  The commander has not recommended P&R.  The respondent's repeated misconduct 

shows a disregard for military standards and an inability or unwillingness to respond to prior efforts 
of rehabilitation. 

7.  Recommendation: Approve the respondent's discharge  om the United States Air Force with a 
general service characterization. 

.-..-..-.-..-..- h.. A:.. 

.............. 

.bbbb 
.-: 

I concur. 

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - v - - - r - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  

Assistant Staff Judge Advocate 

C - . . - . . - . . - . . - . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - '  

Staff Judge Advocate