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 APPERANCE HEARING

 

   

 

 

 

REMARKS : : ]
+ Remove Misconduct, Minor Displinary Infractions under paragraph 5.46 of AFR 39-10 from the reason and authority for”
the discharge.

Case heard at Washington, D.C.

Advise applicant of the decision of the Board and the right to a personal appearance with/without counsel, and the right to
submit an application to the AFBCMR.

 
 

 

 

SIGNATURE OF REC@R i, as a oe SIGNATURE OF BOARD PRESIDENT

    

 

 

 

   

SAF/MIBR SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL
530 C STREET WEST, SUITE 40 AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742 1535 COMMAND DR, EE WING, 3°? FLOOR

ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

 

 

 

 

AFHQ FORM 0-2077, JAN 00 (EF-V2) Previous edition will be used.
CASE NUMBER

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE | pep 002-0116

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 but declined to
exercise this right.

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

FINDINGS: The Board grants partial relief. The discharge is upgraded to Honorable. Change of reason
and authority for discharge are denied.

The Board finds that neither the evidence of record or that provided by the applicant substantiates an
impropriety that would justify change of reason or authority for the discharge. However, based on the
record and evidence provided by the applicant, the Board find’s the applicant’s character of discharge is
inequitable.

Issues. Applicant received a general discharge for both minor disciplinary infractions and exceeding weight
standards. Applicant’s misconduct included two Letters of Reprimand and an Unfavorable Information File
(UIF) for failing to attend mandatory fitness training on numerous occasions during the periods 23 August

to 13 November 1991 and again from 2 to 30 December 1992, after directed to do so repeatedly by her |”

Squadron Section Commander. She also had an Article 15 for dress and appearance violations, and a
vacation of suspended punishment for writing a non-sufficient fund check. The record reflects additional
financial irresponsibility, but member was apparently not counseled for those infractions. Other documents
in the file indicate duty performance problems, but for which she was also not apparently counseled. The
record also reflected member had a diagnosed adjustment disorder and personality disorder. Regarding the
weight management failures, member had a Letter of Counseling, four Letters of Reprimand, UIF entries,
was placed on the Control Roster, and was administratively demoted due to at least five failures. At the time
of the discharge, member had only been on her current base about 6 weeks, and she requested to be
discharged based only on her weight management failures and noted she had not had any misconduct for the
previous 7 months and had been allowed to PCS. Applicant’s issues are essentially the same now. After a
thorough and complete consideration of the information submitted by the applicant and contained in the
records, the Board concluded there was sufficient mitigation to substantiate upgrade of the discharge.
Specifically, the Board found the characterization of service was too harsh. However, they did not condone

member’s misconduct and did not find sufficient justification to change the reason and authority for the
discharge.

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 foregoing findings, the Board further concludes that the overall quality of
applicant’s service is more accurately reflected by an Honorable discharge. The applicant’s
characterization should be changed to Honorable under the provisions of Title 10, USC 1553.

Attachment:
Examiner's Brief
FD2002-0116

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD
ANDREWS AFB, MD

(Former AB) (HGH A1C)

 

1, MATTER UNDER REVIEW: Appl rec’d a GEN Disch fr USAF 94/01/14 UP AFR 39-10,
para 5-46 & 5-62 (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions & Exceeding Weight
Standards). Appeals for Honorable Disch.

2. BACKGROUND:

a. DOB: 72/10/16. Emlmt Age: 17 10/12. Disch Age: 21 2/12. Educ:HS DIPL,
AFQOT: N/A. A-76, E-81, G-76, M-77. PAFSC: 4F051 — Aeromedical Journeyman.

DAS: 93/12/28.

b. Prior Sv: (1) AFRes 90/09/11 - 91/01/30 (4 months 20 days) (Inactive) .

3. SERVICE UNDER REVIEW:
a. Enlisted as AB 91/01/31 for 4 yrs. Svd: 02 Yrs 11 Mo 14 Das, all AMS.

b. Grade Status: AMN - 93/02/26 (Article 15, Vacation, 93/06/07)
Alc - 92/11/01
AMN - 91/07/31

c. Time Lost: none.

d. Art 15’s: (1) 93/06/07, Vacation, Misawa AB, Japan - Article 134.
You, did, on or about 21 May 93, make and utter to the
wert cee a certain check, in the amount of $25.95,
dated 21 May 93, drawn upon the ~----- Bank, made
payable to the order of --------- for the purchase of
something of value, and did thereafter dishonorably
fail to maintain sufficient funds in said bank for
payment of said check in full upon its presentment for
payment. Reduction to Amn. (No appeal) (No mitigation)

(2) 93/02/26, Misawa AB, Japan - Article 92. You, did, on
or about 9 Feb 93, fail to obey a general lawful
regulation, to wit: para 2-20a, Air Force Regulation
35-10, dated 1 April 89, by wrongfully going outside
without proper headgear. You, did, on or about 9, Feb
93, fail to obey a general lawful regulation, to wit:
para 8-1, Air Force Regulation 35-10, dated 1 April 89,
by wrongfully wearing an Air Force Uniform without
proper grade insignia. Reduction to Amn (suspended
until 21 Aug 93), forfeiture of $195 pay, 14 days
restriction and 14 days extra duty. (No appeal) (No
mitigation)
FD2002-0116

e. Additional: LOR, 21 NOV 91 - Failed to obey lawful order.
LOR, 10 JAN 93 - Failed to obey lawful order.
LOC, 25 OCT 91 - Exceeding body fat standards.
LOR, 09 DEC 91 - Exceeding body fat standards.
LOR, 18 JUN 92 - Exceeding body fat standards.
LOR, 24 NOV 93 - Exceeding body fat standards.
LOR, 16 DEC 93 - Exceeding body fat standards.

£. CM: none.

g. Record of SV: 91/01/31 - 92/09/29 Misawa AB 4 (Initial)
92/09/30 - 93/06/01 Misawa AB 2 (CRO) REF

(Discharged from Malmstrom AFB)
h. Awards & Decs: AFTR, NDSM, AFOQUA, AFOSLTR.

i. Stmt of Sv: TMS: (03) Yrs (04) Mos (04) Das
TAMS: (02) Yrs (11) Mos (14) Das

4. BASIS ADVANCED FOR REVIEW: Appin (DD Fm 293) dtd 02/03/08.
(Change Discharge to Honorable)

Issue 1: I had some major issues in the beginning of my military career
which did cause some major problems with me adjusting to the military (Death of
my fiancé & not knowing my father). I did receive psychiatric counseling in
regards to these issues. When I was stationed in Misawa the first sergeant did
try to discharge me with this discharge which I fought & won. If did feel like I
was singled out by the first sergeant i.e.: Article 15 for not having a cover
while wearing my parka hood at the same time another airman in our office
divulged personnal (sic) medical information about another airman to people at
the NCO Club & she received an LOC. When I finally got to my next station I
had gained weight & was tired of struggling to stay in the military. My
experience in Misawa showed me what can happen when 1 person doesn’t like you
(my first srgt.(sic) had promised me he would see me out of the military within
a couple weeks of me arriving on that station). It was a joke in my office that
I was the eternal airman & that I was an excellent medic just not a very good
airman. I still excel in the medical career field & am presently in school
pursuing my degree in Health Care Administration so that when I’m done I can run
a nursing home & correct the wrongs I’ve seen. In Montana I didn’t fight the
discharge because I was “tired” & did just want out. I thought I was being
discharged for my weight but it wasn’t & they hadn’t sent the information I had
used to fight that 39-10. I had lost contact with a number of people that had
written letters on my behalf. I request that my discharge be corrected to
honorable due to weight management problems, failure to do so could jepordize
(sic) my ability to finish my degree.
FD2002-0116

ATCH

1. Letter of Recommendation.
2. Employee Performance Evaluation.

 

+ She ap Gee Je hea aa re aed

oie

02/06/26/ia

-
#
Fy2002-0 VO

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
HEADQUARTERS 43D AIR REFUELING WING (AMC)

 

12 JAN 1994

MEMORANDUM FOR 43 ARW/CC

FROM: 43 ARW/JA.
7218 Goddard Drive
Malmstrom AFB, Montana 59402-6860

 

SUBJECT: Legal Review, Administrative Discharge Action,{iigiammamacandllil ii

 

1. ACTION: Administrative discharge action was initiated on 5 Jan 94 again the
Respondent) under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 5, Sections H and K, paragraphs 5-64

and 5-62, for Minor Disciplinary Infractions and Exceeding Body Fat Standards. Under AFR 39-
10, paragraph 6-2b, the Respondent is not entitled to a board hearing. Captain Qaailiiaes,,

Gans Med Grp/CCQ, has recommended a General discharge without probation and

rehabilitation.

2. PERSONAL DATA:

a. Date and Term of Current Enlistment: 31 Jan 91; 4 Years
b. Age: 21
c, Pay Date: 31 Jan 91

d. TAFMSD: 31 Jan 91
e. Overall Ratings on Performance Reports:

30 Sep 92 - 1 Jun 93; 2 31 Jan 91 - 29 Sep 92; 4

3. EVIDENCE FOR THE GOVERNMENT: The following provides the basis for discharge
and may be considered on the issue of retention.

AMC - GLOBAL REACH FOR AMERICA
hei i
Pp 2etz~ o/b

a. Basis for paragraph 5-46:

 

(1) On or about 23 Aug 91 through 13 Nov 9] gage failed to obey a lawful
order given to her by the commander by failing to report to the gym for mandatory fitness
training. For this misconduct she received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 21 Nov 91.

(2) On or about 2 Dec 92 through 30 Dec 92, CRE acain failed to obey a
lawful order given to her by the commander by failing to report to the gym for mandatory
fitness training. For this misconduct she received a LOR on 10 Jan 93. An Unfavorable

Information File (ULF) was established on 16 Jan 93.

(3) Onor about 9 Feb 93 SQM failed to obey a general lawful regulation, AFR

35-10, by going outside without the proper headgear and by wearing an Air Force uniform
without the proper grade insignia. For this misconduct she received an Article 15 resulting in
reduction in grade from A1C to Amn (suspended), forfeiture of $195.00 pay, 14 days restriction
and 14 days extra duty on 26 Feb 93, The Article 15 was filed in her established UIF.

(4) On or about 21 May 93, ABgggi§iMPwrote a check to the Army and Air Force
Exchange Service in the amount of $25.95 that was returned for nonsufficient finds. For this

misconduct her Article 15 suspension of reduction in grade from AlC to Amn was vacated on
25 Jun 93. The vacation action was filed in her UIF.

b. Basis for paragraph 5-62:

(1) On 9 Jul 91, AB @iliime was entered into the Weight Management Program
(WMP) when her body fat was measured at 38%, 10% above her maximum allowable body fat
(MABF) standard. Her first failure following her entrance into Phase I of the WMP occurred
on 23 Oct 91, when she was found to have a body fat measurement (BFM) of 39%, a 6%
increase in body fat from her 23 Sep 91 measurement. For this failure she received a Letter of

Counseling on 25 Oct 91,

(2) On6 Dec 91, AB@MREGRRM second failure occurred while in Phase I of the WMP
when her monthly BFM was 40%, a 1% body fat increase from her 23 Oct 91 BFM. She failed

to lose the required 2% body fat per month IAW AFR 35-11. For this failure she received a
Letter of Reprimand (LOR) on 9 Dec 91.

(3) On 16 Jun 92, APORRIRIE third failure occurred while in Phase I of the WMP
when her monthly BFM was 33%, a 6% body fat increase from her 15 May 92 BFM. She failed

to lose the required 2% body fat per month JAW AFR 35-11. For this failure she received a
LOR on 18 Jun 92 and an Unfavorable Information File (UIF) was established on 24 Jun 92.

(4) On10 Nov 93, AB RE fourth failure occurred while in the 1-Year Probation
Period when her monthly BFM was 29%, a 3% body fat increase from her 22 Feb 93 BFM. For
this failure she was reentered into Phase I and received a LOR on 24 Nov 93.
_ PP 2602- O//6

(5) On 13 Dec 93, ABS RRR can failure occurred while in Phase I of the WMP

when her monthly BFM was 34%, a 5% body fat increase and 9 pounds increase in body
weight. She failed to lose the required 1% body fat or 3 pounds body weight IAW AFR 35-11,
IMC 93-1. For this failure she received a LOR, placed on a Control Roster on 16 Dec 93 and a
demotion action was initiated on 17 Dec 93. She was reduced in grade from Amn to AB on

30 Dec 93. The LOR was filed in her existing UIF.

4. EVIDENCE FOR THE RESPONDENT: The Respondent exercised her right to consult
military counsel and her right to submit a statement in her behalf for your consideration (Atch 4 to

Tab 3). The Respondent's statement may be summarized as follows:
a. Requests that she be discharged solely on her failure under the WMP.

b. The Respondent requests that her minor disciplinary infractions be looked at closely.
States she has not been in trouble since she has been assigned to Malmstrom AFB. In fact, her

last act of misconduct occurred over seven (7) months ago.

c. The Respondent states she was not treated fairly at her last base. She also feels she is not
being treated fairly here at Malmstrom AFB. She does not understand why she was allowed to
PCS if she was such a disciplinary problem. She views the minor disciplinary portion of her AFR
39-10 package as a means of punishing her and preventing her from using her GI bill to continue

her education.

d. She agrees she has a problem with her weight but if the entire package is reviewed, there
is an explanation. States that her squadron failed to include a response to one of her LORs and

her Article 15.

5. OPTIONS:

a. Disapprove the discharge action and direct the Respondent be retained in the United States |
Air Force.

b. Approve the discharge and direct the Respondent be discharged for Minor Disciplinary
Infractions and Exceeding Body Fat Standards under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 5,
Sections H and K, paragraphs 5-46 and 5-62, with an Honorable discharge with or without
probation and rehabilitation and forward the case to 15 AF/CC for final decision.

c. Approve the discharge and direct the Respondent be discharged for Minor Disciplinary
Infractions and Exceeding Fat Standards under the provisions of AFR 39-10, Chapter 5, Sections
Hand K, paragraphs 5-46 and 5-62 with a General_discharge with or without probation and

rehabilitation.
Pp 2002- O76

 

d. Recommend the Respondent be discharged with an Under_Other Than Honorable
Conditions discharge with or without probation and rehabilitation. If you determine that this 1s
the appropriate disposition of this case, you must retum the file for discharge board processing.

6. DISCUSSION:

4

a. The file is legally sufficient to support Captain