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:

	Vice Chair
	Member
	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.