AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD	
NAME 01<' SERVICE MEMBER (LAST, FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL}		
PERSONAL APPEARANCE
NAME OF COUNSEL A1, \fD OR ORGANIZATION		

GRADE

AFSN/SSAN

X   RECORD REVIEW
ADDRESS MD OR ORGANIZ.A-T ON-0.f-(0lJN-SEL	1
MEMBERS SITTING
x x x x

INDEX NUMBER
A67.10	1	ORDER APPOINTING THE BOARD
2	APPLICATION  FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE
J	LETTER  OF NOTIFICATION

HEARING DATE
02-08-07

CASE NUMBER
FD2002-0094

4	BRIEF OF PERSONNEL FILE COUNSEL'S RELEASE TO THE BOARD
ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SUBMITf ED AT TIME OF
PERSONAL APPEARANCE

TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAL APPERANCE HEARING

REMARKS
Case heard at Washington, D.C.

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

SAF/MIBR	/
550 C STRE!:f WEST, SUITE 40 RANDOLPH AFB, TX 78150-4742

SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE PERSONNEL COUNCIL AJR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOA.RD
1535 COMMAND DR. EE WING, 3RP FLOOR
ANDREWS AFB, MD 20762-7002

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

AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE	CASE NUMBER

FD2002-0094	

GENERAL:  The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable.
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: Upgrade of discharge is denied.

The Board finds the applicant submitted no issues contesting the equity or propriety of the discharge, and after a thorough review of the record, the Board was unable to identify any.

Issues. Applicant was discharged for both minor disciplinary infractions and unsatisfactory performance in the Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP). Minor  disciplinary  infractions  were  the primary reason for discharge.  She had two Letters or Records of Individual Counsel ing, five Letters of Reprimand, and an Article 15. Her misconduct included multiple instances of dereliction  of her primary duties over an 8-month period, and 12 incidents of failing to maintain weight and body fat standards and failing to lose the required amount of body fat percentage or weight while on the WBFMP over a 3.5·year period. At the time of the discharge, applicant unconditionally waived her right to have her case heard by an administrative discharge board. The Discharge Review Board (DRB) noted  that member was responsible for her actions of misconduct and was properly held accountable for those. She was counseled repeatedly and given numerous - opportunities to conform her behavior but failed to respond to those rehabilitative efforts. With regard to the unsatisfactory WBFMP performance, she was given numerous opportunities to improve and make satisfactory progress, but failed to do so, and routinely gained yet more weight.  No inequity or impropriety was found in this discharge in the course of the records review.

The applicant stated she was told her discharge could be upgraded upon application after  6 months, inferring the perception it would be an automatic upgrade.  This may be the result of miscommunication  or a misunderstanding on applicant's part. While discharges may be upgraded  after 6 months, upgrades are not automatic. A discharge is upgraded only if the individual and DRB can establish an inequity or impropriety took place at the time of the discharge. In this case, none was found, so the Board denied the appeal.

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.

In view of the foregoing findings the board further concludes that there exists no legal or equitable basis for upgrade of discharge, thus the applicant's discharge should not be changed.

Attachment: Examiner's Brief