RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00457
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His general under honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to
honorable.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Other than using poor judgment in sharing an offensive joke told
to him by an Air Force retiree, he deserves an upgraded
discharge. He has remained active with veterans organizations
as well as volunteering at the local VA hospital.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 23 Apr
90.
On 26 Nov 91 he received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for failing
to report to his duty location and not notifying anyone in
advance he would not be able to attend the scheduled meeting.
The commander established an Unfavorable Information File (UIF)
due to these actions.
On 6 Apr 92 and 4 May 92, he received LORs for failing to
maintain body fat within Air Force standards. He had only
decreased 1% after being enrolled in the Air Force Weight
Management Program (WMP), which requires at least a 2%
reduction.
According to a letter dated, 16 Jun 92, the applicant had a
personal hearing with his commander regarding his progress in
the WMP. The commander stated that since this was his third
failure to maintain Air Force weight management standards he
would recommend that demotion action be taken. On 6 Jul 92, he
was administratively demoted to the rank of airman (E-2) under
the provisions of AFR 39-30, Administrative Demotion of Airmen.
On 13 Oct 92, the applicant received non-judicial punishment
under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for
being disrespectful to a superior noncommissioned officer by
giving her a piece of paper which contained a racially and
sexually offensive story. He was reduced in rank to airman
basic (E-1) and restricted to the base for 60 days.
On 28 Oct 92 his squadron commander notified him he was
recommending him for a general (under honorable conditions)
discharge under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Airman Separation
Manual, Paragraph 5-46, Misconduct Minor Disciplinary
Infractions. The applicant waived his right to counsel and did
not submit any personal statements for consideration.
On 4 Nov 92, the discharge action was found legally sufficient
sighting the significant negative aspects of his conduct
outweighing the positive aspects of his military record. His
commander approved the discharge without probation or
rehabilitation, on 6 Nov 92.
On 17 Nov 92, the applicant received a general (under honorable
conditions) discharge with a narrative reason for separation as
Misconduct - Pattern of Minor Disciplinary Infractions. He was
credited with 2 years, 6 months, and 25 days of active service
excluding 2 months and 21 days of lost time.
The applicant appealed to the Air Force Discharge Review Board
(AFDRB) and was notified on 12 Dec 94 that they had carefully
reviewed and considered all the facts of record and concluded no
change in his discharge was warranted.
On 28 Apr 14, a request for post-service information was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit C). As of this date, no response has been received by
this office.
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, to include his
rebuttal response, 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,
we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient to recommend
granting relief on that basis. 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-2014-00457 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 14.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Information Bulletin, not dated.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
3
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
4
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 | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03988
On 11 Dec 85, the applicant received an honorable discharge. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. While we acknowledge the applicants request to have her Staff Sergeant rank reinstated due to current weight management program standards, this board notes that standards in effect during the applicants service were the standards to be adhered to by all Air Force service members at that time.
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0116
PEKSUONAL APPEARANCE _| X RECORD REVIEW NAME OF COUNSEL AND OR ORGANIZATION * ADDRESS AND OR ORGANIZATION OF COUNSEL MEMBERS SITTING ae, PT {ISSUES INDEX NUMBER BITS SUBMITE DAR A94.06, A93.10 A67.10 1 | ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD 2 | APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE — 3 | LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HEARING DATE CASE NUMBER 4 | BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE ° 02-08-15 FD2002-0116 COUNSEL’S RELEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITTED AT TIME OF ™ PERSONAL APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL...
On 13 Jan 97, the applicant's commander notified him of his intent to recommend to the demotion authority that he be demoted. On 4 Sep 97, the applicant's commander requested that the applicant original rank be restored, which the demotion authority approved. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant indicated that he has requested the Board adjust his DOR because there are currently no options for a commander to suspend demotion in an administrative demotion action.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01222
He remained in the WMP for a period of 2 years and 10 months, during which time he received 2 LORS, control roster action, and demotion to the grade of sergeant for his failure to maintain Air Force weight standards. His military medical records indicate that during two separate separation physical examinations he was found medically qualified for separation and had described his health as very good, with no health problems. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00923
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00923 INDEX CODE: 100.06, 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed so that he can join the Air National Guard. On 28 Jan 93, the applicant failed to maintain his body fat at or below the...
Applicant continued in t h e WMP and on 19 October 1990, he received a Letter of Counseling for being 29 % pounds over his MAW. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Acting Chief , Commander's Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPSFC, states that maintaining Air Force weight standards is an individual responsibility. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states, in summary, that he is not questioning whether the Air Force had the...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). A medical evaluation, diet counseling(s), 90-day exercise program, and monthly checks are provided as rehabilitative support for individuals who exceed weight and body fat standards. The Interim Message Change (IMC) 93-1, to AFR 35-1 1, 5 Feb 91, was not effective until 30 Jun 93.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, states that the applicant was demoted from staff sergeant to senior airman effective and with a date of rank of 3 June 1994 in accordance with AFR 39-30 for failure to maintain weight within Air Force standards. A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit E. The Chief, Retirements Branch, HQ...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03414
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, states that the applicant was demoted from staff sergeant to senior airman effective and with a date of rank of 3 June 1994 in accordance with AFR 39-30 for failure to maintain weight within Air Force standards. A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit E. The Chief, Retirements Branch, HQ...