RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03898
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge be upgraded to an Honorable discharge.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Having a General discharge does not allow him access to some veteran opportunities. His commanding officer led him to believe that his General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge would automatically be upgraded to an Honorable discharge after six months. Not until recently, when his application for membership in a credit union for veterans was turned-down, did he learn there was no automatic upgrade of his General discharge.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 26 Apr 84.
On 15 Jan 85, it was determined the applicant was clinically obese and entered into the Air Force Weight Management Program (WMP).
On 18 Apr 86, the applicants commander issued him a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for unsatisfactory and inconsistent performance in the WMP.
On 12 Jun 86, the applicants commander issued him a LOR for unsatisfactory progress in the WMP, placed him on the control roster for a period of four months, and created an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) on him.
On 21 Jul 86, the applicants commander denied his award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM) for the period 26 Apr 84 thru 11 Oct 86.
On 13 Aug 86, the applicants commander issued him a LOR for dereliction of duty for failing to report to his appointed place of duty a violation of Article 92, UCMJ.
On 11 Sep 86, the applicants commander notified him he was recommending his discharge from the Air Force for minor disciplinary infractions and unsatisfactory performance. The reasons for this action were:
a. During the period 25 Aug 86 to 29 Aug 86, the applicant failed to attend his daily aerobics exercise classes as directed by the base commander.
b. On 22 Aug 86, the applicant failed to report for duty on time, and was not in compliance with AFR 35-10, Dress and Appearance, for which he received a letter of counseling (LOC).
c. On 18 Aug 86 and 26 Aug 86, the applicant failed to make his weekly and monthly weigh-ins, and did not inform the weight control monitor as to the reasons for these no shows.
d. On 12 Aug 86, the applicant failed to report to his appointed place of duty, for which he received a LOR.
e. On 27 May 86, the applicant failed to make his monthly weigh in, a mandatory appointment under the WMP, for which he received a LOC.
On 11 Sep 86, the applicants commander recommended him for discharge. The applicant subsequently acknowledged receipt of the action, waived his right to an administrative discharge board hearing, and submitted statements in his own behalf. The case was found to be legally sufficient.
On 22 Sep 86, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged and furnished a General discharge.
On 7 Oct 86, the applicant was furnished a General (Under Honorable Conditions) discharge, with a Narrative Reason for Separation of Exceeding Air Force Weight Standards, and was credited with 2 years, 5 months, and 12 days of active service.
On 3 Jun 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we find no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the available evidence of record, it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicants post-service activities, there is no way for us to determine if the applicants accomplishments since leaving the service are sufficiently meritorious to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03898 in Executive Session on 10 Jul 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03898 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Jun 14.
On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00076
This was a one pound weight loss and four percent body fat gain from your previous (ita monthly weight evaluation on 26 Jun 96, constituting unsatisfactory progress on the [P. On 14 Aug 96, you acknowledged your weight and body fat percentage determined on 30 Jul 96, as evidenced by your signature on AF Form 393, Individual Record of Weight Management, at attachment 1. g. On 7 Oct 96, you weighed 240 pounds and your body fat percentage was determined to be JS? In response to this...
After notification, the applicant provided a statement explaining his problems with the AMWAY solicitation and his weight. The Chief recommended applicant’s retirement as a 1LT. AC-XXXXXX, dated 29 Jan 96, directed that, effective 29 Feb 96, the applicant would be relieved from active duty and retired effective 1 Mar 96 in the grade of captain.
Interestingly, the summary of applicant’s hospitalization in 1981 that resulted in his being placed on that medication describes his appearance as “mildly obese” and further review of records shows that his enlistment physical examination in Feb 71 recorded his weight at 213 pounds, well over weight standards at the time he was allowed to join the Air Force. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03534
Interestingly, the summary of applicant’s hospitalization in 1981 that resulted in his being placed on that medication describes his appearance as “mildly obese” and further review of records shows that his enlistment physical examination in Feb 71 recorded his weight at 213 pounds, well over weight standards at the time he was allowed to join the Air Force. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00314 INDEX CODES 110.02 111.02 111.05 126.04 134.01 134.02 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: No XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 1984 general discharge for “Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions” be upgraded to honorable and the narrative reason be changed to “Medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-02656
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01902
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01902 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to honorable. On 17 Jun 88, the discharge was found to be legally sufficient. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicants post-service...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03431
A Report of Individual Counseling dated 6 Nov 87 indicated the applicant had been advised he was being considered for discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. On 8 Feb 88, he was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend discharge for failure to progress in the WMP. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRS provide their rationale for recommend denial.
_______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Applicant’s counsel submitted a 21-page Brief of Counsel with 17 exhibits to show that the applicant suffered an injustice when his squadron commander failed to completely implement his medical waiver from participation in the Air Force WMP and, subsequently issued him a LOR for unsatisfactory progress in the WMP resulting in the applicant losing his promotion to TSgt. Doctor D_______ concluded that a...