AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD 

MIDDLE INITIAL) 

TYPE GEN  X 

PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

'WEL  NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION 

YES 

No 
X 

IUDPX ~ I ' L I I I E R   A67.50 

GRADE 

I  AB 

I  AFSNISSAN 

RECORD REVIEW 

ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL 

I 

I 

I 

I  ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 

I 
EXHIBITS SUBhlITTED 'TO  THE BOARD 
I  1 
1  2  1  APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE 
3  1  LETTER OF NOTIFICATION 
4  1  BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE 

HEARING DATE 

CASE NUMBER 

COUNSEL'S  RELEASE TO THE BOARD 
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBhlITTED AT TIME OF 
PERSONAL APPEARANCE 

I  TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL  APWAKANCE 

1 

06 Apr 2006 
APPLICANT'S  ESUE AND THE BOARDS DECISlO3'AL RATIONAL ARE DISCUSSED ON THE AITACHED AIR FORCE DISCHAROE REVIEW  BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

FD-2005-00467 

I 

I 

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. 

L - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2  

ISDORSEMENT 

L).%TE: 1117/2006 

TO: 

SAFIMRBR 
550 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 

SECRETARY OFTHE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL 
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 
1555 COMMAND DQ  EE WING, 3RD FLOOR 
ANDREWS AFB. MD 20762-7002 

I 
(EF-V2) 

Previous edition will be used 

L 

I 

1 
I 

I 

I 

I 

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE 

CASE NUMBER 

FD-2005-00467 

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

The applicant appeared and testified before the Discharge 
06 Apr 2006.  The following witness, MSgt  (Ret.) ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  
the applicant's behalf. 

, _ _ _  _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _  

Review Board (DRB), without counsel, at Andrews AFB on 
the applicant's  grandfather,  also testified on 

The following additional exhibits were presented before the Board: 

Exhibit #5: The applicant's resume with references 
Exhibit #6: Job Description 
Exhibit #7: Letters of Recommendation (3) 

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

FINDINGS:  The Board  grants an upgrade  of  discharge to  Honorable.  The request  for the  change of reason  and 
authority for discharge and change of reenlistment code is denied. 

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record nor that provided by applicant which substantiates an impropriety 
that would justify  a change  of discharge.  However, based collectively  upon  the  record  and evidence  and testimony 
provided  by  applicant,  the  Board  finds  that  the  applicant's  discharge  was  indeed  too  harsh  and, thus,  approved  an 
upgrade of discharge to Honorable. 

ISSUE:  The applicant contends that his discharge was inequitable because it was "too harsh, considering all else that 
was going on"  at the time.  In reverse order of occurrence, the records indicated that the applicant received  an Article 
15 (for loitering and use of a personal  cellular telephone while on duty), three Letters of Reprimand  (one for a missed 
mandatory  fitness  appointment  and twice  late for duty) and one Letter of Counseling  (late  for duty for a third time), 
In  explaining  the  reasons  for  the  recurring  instances  of 
resulting  in  his  discharge  for  a  pattern  of  misconduct. 
tardiness,  the applicant  testified  that he did not  own a personal  vehicle  for transportation  to and from work,  and that 
the  base  did  not  provide  transportation  fi-om his  dormitory  to  his  assigned  to  place  of  duty  (Cheyenne  Mountain 
complex), roughly a distance of 15 miles.  The applicant instead reportedly relied upon a co-worker for transportation, 
who in at least one instance departed for work and left the applicant behind without notification.  In another instance (4 
April 2005), the applicant was required to report to duty at 1645, but instead showed up at 1720.  The Board favorably 
considered  the  possibility  that  the  applicant's  tardiness  was  the  result  of  forgetting  about  the  change  of  time  to 
Daylight Saving Time, as he testified was the case.  The Board acknowledged that Air Force members are responsible 
to  reaching  their  place  of  duty  in  a  timely  manner,  regardless  to  the  availability of  base-sponsored  transportation. 
However, the Board believed that the applicant's relative remote duty location and the lack of dedicated transportation 
from  his  place  of  residence  created  a  unique  obstacle,  which  otherwise  would  not  have  resulted  in  most  of  the 
applicant's instances of tardiness, were he assigned at any of the vast majority of Air Force installations where there is 
easy  access to and fi-om work or alternate modes  of base  transportation.  With reference to the applicant's  failure to 
attend a mandatory fitness appointment, the Board considered the possibility that he was unable to access the full text 
of  an  email  notification  to  all  affected  personnel,  as he  testified.  However, the  Board  noted  that the  applicant had 
access to alternative computer devices within his place of duty and that he could have consulted with his supervisor for 
clarification of the requirement,  instead of choosing to rely upon his personal computer at his place of residence. With 
reference  to the applicant's  most serious instance  of misconduct,  and that which likely formed the principal basis for 
his discharge, the  applicant testified  that while he and a junior  partner  were posted  as gate  sentinels, each individual 
errantly  failed  to  adequately  monitor  and  clear  a  vehicle  that  entered  the  base  without  proper  authorization,  while 
reportedly  distracted  by  either  handling  or  using  a  personal  cellular  telephone.  However,  without  the  applicant's 
prompt notification  of proper authorities, the unauthorized base entrant would not have been  apprehended nor would 
command officials have been  aware of the error.  While the applicant's actions do not mitigate his failure to properly 
monitor  a vehicle, the Board believed  that he would  likely not have received non-judicial  punishment  had he chosen 

not  to  self-report the  events that  took  place.  The  Board  noted  the  expansive pre-service  accomplishments  of  the 
applicant  that  reflect  a  positive  work  ethic  and  high  moral  character,  to  include  his  academic  achievements, 
participation  as  a  teacher's  aide  at  a  university,  top  Civil  Air  Patrol  recognition,  selection  for  a  Congressional 
internship, and volunteer work in the Office of Presidential Student Correspondence (The White House).  The Board 
also acknowledged the recognition of the applicant's leadership qualities, while serving as a member of the 332nd Drill 
Team, 332"* Training Squadron, Keesler AFB, Mississippi.  Likewise, the  Board was pleased to  see the applicant's 
post-service accomplishments and his employment in the computer technology field in a public school system.  While, 
none of the applicant's misconduct reflects favorably upon his Air Force career, in consideration of the totality of his 
military service, and the mitigating circumstances surrounding some of the applicant's misconduct, the Board believed 
his military service is best characterized as Honorable. 

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 special circumstances surrounding several instances of the applicant's misconduct, the Board 
concluded that the overall quality of his service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge, but that the 
reason for discharge and the RE code shall remain unchanged. 

Attachment: 
Examiner's Brief 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 

AIR  FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD 

ANDREWS AFB, MD 

I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  

(Former AB)  (HGH AlC) 

1.  MATTER UNDER REVIEW:  Appl rec'd a GEN Disch fr USAF Peterson AFB, CO on 24 
Jun 05 UP AFI 36-3208, para 5.50.2 (Pattern of Misconduct  -  Conduct Prejudicial 
to Good Order and Discipline).  Appeals for Honorable Discharge, and to Change 
the RE Code, Reason and Authority for Discharge. 

2.  BACKGROUND: 

a. DOB: 15 Sep 82.  Enlmt Age: 21 5/12.  Disch Age: 22 9/12. Educ: HS DIPL. 
AFQT: N/A.  A-76,  E-82,  G-55,  M-57. PAFSC: 3P031 -  Security Forces Apprentice. 
DAS: 13 Dec 04. 

b.  Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 20 Feb 04 -  19 Apr 04  (2 months) (Inactive) . 

3.  SERVICE UNDER REVIEW: 

a.  Enlisted as A1C 20 Apr 04 for 4 yrs. Svd: 01 Yrs 02 Mo 05 Das, all AMS. 

b.  Grade Status:  AB  -  6 May 05  (Article 15, 6 May 05) 

c.  Time Lost:  None. 

d.  Art 15's:  (1) 6 May 05, Peterson AFB, CO -  Article 92.  You, who knew 

of your duties at or near Cheyeanne Mountain AFS, 
Colorado, on or about 5 Apr 05, were derelict in the 
performance of those duties in that you willfully failed 
to refrain from talking on your personal cellular phone 
while posted as a sentinel, as it was your duty to do. 
Article 134.  You, while posted as a sentinel, did, at 
or near Cheyenne Mountain AFS, Colorado, on or about 5 
Apr 05, loiter on your post.  Reduction to AB, and a 
reprimand. (Appeal/Denied) (No mitigation) 

e.  Additional: LOR, 08 APR 05 -  Failure to go. 
LOR, 06 APR 05 -  Late for duty. 
LOR, 26 MAR  05 -  Late for duty. 
LOC, 15 MAR  05 -  Late for duty for the third time in the 

past two months. 

f.  CM:  None 

g.  Record of SV: None. 

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

i.  Stmt of Sv:  TMS: (01) Yrs  (04) Mos  (05) Das 

TAMS:  (01) Yrs  (02) Mos  (05) Das 

4.  BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW:  Appln  (DD Fm 293) dtd 01 Dec 05. 

(Change Discharge to Honorable, and Change the RE Code, Reason and Authority 

for Discharge) 

Issue 1:  I'm requesting an upgrade to my discharge because I plan on 

returning to the USAF Reserve Program as an officer and my current status makes 
me ineligible to receive the Montgomery GI Bill money towards finishing my 
education as a computer networking major. 

ATCH 
1. DD Form 214  (Member 1) . 
2. Copy of Discharge Correspondence. 

MEMORANDUM FOR ABj . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  

, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  

FROM:  721 SFSICC 

SUBJECT:  Notification Memorandum 

I. Recommendation:  I am recommending your discharge from the  United States 
Air  Force  for  a  Pattern  of  Misconduct,  Conduct  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 may be characterized as 
either  Honorable,  Under  Honorable Conditions  (General),  or  Under  Other  Than 
Honorable Conditions.  I am recommending that your  service  be characterized as 
Under Honorable Conditions (General). 

2.  My reasons for this action are: 

a.  On or about 5 Apr 05, you were derelict in the performance of your duties in 
that you willfully failed to  refrain from talking on your personal cellular phone while 
posted as a sentinel, as it was your duty to do.  For this  rrrisconduct you received 
Nonjudicial Punishment dated 6 May 05.  Punishment consisted of reduction to the 
grade of Airman Basic, with a new date of rank of 6 May 05.  This information was 
added to your Unfavorable Information ~ i l e  (UIF) ( ~ t c h  1). 

b.  On or about 5 Apr  05, you were  loitering on post.  For this  misconduct you 
received  Nonjudicial  Punishment  dated  6  May  05.  Punishment  consisted  of 
reduction to the grade of Airman Basic, with a new date of rank of 6 May 05.  This 
information was added to your UIF (Atch 1). 

c.  On or about 4 Apr 05, you failed to attend a mandatory fitness appointment. 
For tl- is  rrrisconduct,  you received a  Letter of Reprimand dated 8 Apr  05 and  you 
were placed on the Control Roster. This information was added to your LllF (Atch 2). 

d.  On  or  about  4  Apr  05,  you  were  late for  duty.  For  this  misconduct you 
received  a  Letter  of  Reprimand dated  6  Apr  05.  This  information  was  used  to 
establish your UIF (Atch 3). 

e.  On or  about  18 Mar 05, you were  late for duty for  the  fourth time  in,a two- 
month period.  For this  misconduct you  received a  Letter of  Reprimand dated 26 
Mar 05 (Atch 4). 

f.  On or about 5 Mar 05, you were late for duty for the third time in a two-month 
period.  For this  misconduct you received a  Letter of Counseling dated  15 Mar 05 
(Atch 5). 

3.  Separation  Authority:  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  higher  authority  will 
decide whether  you  will  be discharged or  retained in the  United States 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,  bonus,  or  education  assistance  funds  may  be  subject  to  recoupment. The 
separation authority will make the findings and recommendations required under 10 
U.S.C. Section 2005(g). 

4  Legal Rights: 

a.  You have the right to consult counsel. 
b.  Military legal counsel has been obtained to assist you. 
c.  I have  made  an  appointment  for  you  to  consult mi 
ips 
, on  2 3 ~ A y c l f  , at  13n.n 
d.  You may consult civilian counsel at your own expense. 

D C  

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , -  

i  at 

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

hours. 

5  Submission of Statement: 

a.  You have the right to subrrrit statements in your own behalf. 
b.  Any statementsyou want the separation authority to consider must reach me 
NLT 1600 hours on J o WQ, 6  2005 (3 workdays) unless you request and 
receive an extension for good cause shown. 

c.  I will send them to the separation authority. 

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

7  Medical Exam:  You have been scheduled for a medical examination.  You must 
report to Peterson Air Force Base Clinic, at  0 ?$"b  hours on  ZS N A  y 
2005 for the examination. 

/ 

8  Privacy Act:  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  Unit 
Orderly Room. 

9  Acknowledgement:  Execute the attached acknowledgment and return it to me 
immediately. 

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

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   at--------;------------------' 

Commander, 721  Security Forces Squadron 

Attachments: 
1.  Nonjudicial Punishment, dated 6 May 05 
2.  Letter of Reprimand, dated 8 Apr 05 
3.  Letter of Reprimand, dated 6 Apr 05 
4.  Letter of Reprimand, dated 26 Mar 05 
5.  Letter of Counseling, dated 15 Mar 05