Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02916
Original file (BC-2002-02916.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02916
            INDEX CODE:  111.03
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be reinstated onto active duty effective the date of her separation.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was pregnant prior to being discharged from the Air Force  but  was  not
given a pregnancy test until after she separated.  She performed her  duties
to the best of her ability.  She was one of the most experienced pickup  and
delivery operators and escorted dignitaries around the base.

In  support  of  her  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,
character references, and extracts from her medical records.   Her  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  7  Sep  00  and   was
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class.

On 25  Feb  02,  applicant  was  notified  by  her  commander  that  he  was
recommending that she be discharged from the Air Force  in  accordance  with
AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.65.  The specific  reason  for  this
action was her failure to make satisfactory progress in the Weight and  Body
Fat Management Program (WBFMP).  She was entered into Phase I of  the  WBFMP
on 14 Aug 01 at a weight of 147 pounds and with a  body  fat  percentage  of
29.   She was required to lose one percent per month  or  three  pounds  per
month until she was below her maximum allowable  body  fat  standard  of  28
percent.  She had four unsatisfactory  periods  while  on  the  WBFMP  which
resulted in her receiving a Letter of  Admonishment  and  three  Letters  of
Reprimand.  She was advised of her rights in this  matter  and  acknowledged
receipt of the notification on that same date.   She  waived  her  right  to
consult with counsel and  elected  not  to  submit  statements  on  her  own
behalf.  In a legal review of the  case,  the  wing  staff  judge  advocate,
found the case legally sufficient and recommended  that  she  be  discharged
with  an  honorable  discharge.   On  4  Mar  02,  the  discharge  authority
concurred with the  recommendation  and  directed  that  she  be  discharged
without probation and rehabilitation.  Applicant  was  discharged  from  the
Air Force on 6 Mar 02.  She served 1 year and 6 months on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The BCMR Medical Consultant recommends denial.  The consultant  states  that
a lab slip dated 27 Mar 02 is in her medical records indicating  a  positive
pregnancy test.  A memorandum dated 24 Jul 02 from her  obstetrician  states
that she was pregnant at 20 weeks gestations with an estimated due  date  of
4 Dec 02.  Based  on  her  obstetrician's  estimate  of  the  stage  of  her
pregnancy at 20 weeks gestation on 24 Jul 02, 6 Mar  02,  the  date  of  her
discharge was the approximate time of conception.   Pregnancy  was  not  the
cause  of  her  inability  to  maintain  weight  standards  or  to  progress
satisfactorily in the  WBFMP.   The  Medical  Consultant  evaluation  is  at
Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS recommends denial of the applicant's request.  DPPRS states  that
the  discharge  was  consistent  with   the   procedural   and   substantive
requirements of the discharge regulation and was within  the  discretion  of
the discharge authority.  She did not submit any  errors  that  occurred  in
the discharge processing and provided no facts warranting a  change  in  her
discharge.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20  Dec
02 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   In
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the  application  was
denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only  be
reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant  evidence  not
considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board  considered  Docket  Number  02-02916  in
Executive Session on 26 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
      Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Aug 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dated 7 Nov 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 13 Dec 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00198

    Original file (BC-2005-00198.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00198 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 JULY 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4B be changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04053

    Original file (BC-2002-04053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that based upon the documentation in the file, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at the time. The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01149

    Original file (BC-2003-01149.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 March 2001, the applicant's commander recommended he be discharged for Failure in the WBFMP. For this failure, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) dated 21 August 2000. c. On 8 November 2000, the applicant failed to make satisfactory progress in Phase 1 of the WBFMP in that he failed to lose the required five pounds or one percent body fat since his previous weight check on 10 October 2000. Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated 26 Nov 03.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-02656

    Original file (BC-2001-02656.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02656 INDEX CODE: 100.06 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4B be changed. While the applicant did meet weight standards on 27 Apr 98, she exceeded her body fat standard by one percent. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04247

    Original file (BC-2003-04247.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSFOC states that they e-mailed the applicant on 21 January 2004 and requested she provide either a copy of her WBFMP case file or a letter of support from her commander detailing how she was unfairly treated while on the WBFMP. Since her record does not contain a letter from her commander recommending promotion to SRA, they must conclude that her promotion remained in withhold status. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03178

    Original file (BC-2002-03178.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    The approved body fat standard adjustment did not take place until after the failures and his promotion to the grade of master sergeant had already been rescinded. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was selected for promotion to the grade of master sergeant, but was rendered ineligible to assume the higher grade because of his failure to make satisfactory progress in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04111

    Original file (BC-2003-04111.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04111 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The “JCR” (Weight Control Failure) separation program designator (SPD) code he received be fixed or upgraded so he is not required to pay back the bonus he received when he enlisted in the Air Force. ...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00025

    Original file (FD2006-00025.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant requests that the reason (Weight and Body Fat Management Program Failure) for his discharge be changed to "For the Convenience of the Government." Attachment: Examiner's Brief DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD ANDREWS AFB, MD (Former SRA) (HGH SRA) 1. (Change Reason and Authority for Discharge) ISSUES ATTACHED TO BRIEF.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01337

    Original file (BC-2004-01337.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 21 Aug 03, the applicant requested a letter stating her diagnosis of insulin resistance and its effects on her weight. At the time the action was taken against her she was undergoing tests for insulin resistance, five years after she told medical personnel she suspected something was wrong because she could not lose weight. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 3 February...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01146

    Original file (BC-2004-01146.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 1 Apr 98, the member was entered into the Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP). Applicant was honorably discharged on 21 Dec 99, in the grade of airman first class, under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208, by reason of weight control failure. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 6 Aug 04, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded...