RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02821
            INDEX CODE:  110.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His narrative reason for discharge be changed to Reduction in Force.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He enlisted in the Air Force on 25 Jun 93 and separated on  29 Sep 95.
He had enlisted for four years and completed  twenty-seven  months  of
his enlistment (he also paid into the GI Bill in the amount of $1200).
 He separated under the Palace Chase program, where he had to complete
twenty-four months of active duty and serve four years in the Selected
Reserves.  After he had completed twenty-seven months, the  recruiters
were unable to find a position for him for  twenty  months.   He  made
several attempts to find  a  position,  but  to  no  avail.   When  he
contacted his local recruiters, they would tell him that there were no
positions available and that they would get in contact with  him  when
one was open.  Finally, he received some assistance  from  TSgt  V---.
She found a job for him that was eligible for a Medical Technician  at
Charleston AFB.  Before he enlisted in the Reserves at Charleston,  he
asked the education department if he was still entitled to educational
benefits under Chapter 30, Montgomery GI Bill.  He was  told  that  he
was in May 97.  He enlisted for six years in the Reserves, which  also
entitled him to the Reserve GI Bill.  However, he would not be able to
use both of  them  in  conjunction  with  one  another.   He  went  to
technical school at Brooks AFB from Jul 97 to Oct 97.  He applied  for
his educational benefits at his school.  Much to his  dismay,  he  was
denied the benefits.  The reason for the denial was that  he  had  not
joined the Selected  Reserves  within  twelve  months.   He  was  very
disappointed that he could be penalized for something that he  had  no
control over.  He appealed, but his request  for  benefits  was  again
denied.  He was advised by his congressional liaison that a change  of
separation would be the best possible action for him to take.

In support of his appeal, the applicant  provided  some  congressional
correspondence, which included  a  personal  statement,  a  supportive
statement,  his  application  for  a  Ready  Reserve  assignment,  and
documentation from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  25  Jun  93.   He  was
released from active duty on 29 Sep 95 under the provisions of AFI 36-
3205  (Intradepartmental  Transfer)  with  service  characterized   as
honorable.  He was credited with 2 years,  3 months,  and  5  days  of
active duty service.

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the
letter  prepared  by  the  appropriate  office  of  the   Air   Force.
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record  of
Proceedings.

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
that, effective 30 Apr 97, the applicant was assigned to the Air Force
Reserve as an Aeromedical Helper.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Separations Branch,  AFPC/DPPRS,  reviewed  this  application  and
indicated that the applicant applied for the Palace Chase  program  in
accordance with AFI 36-3205 and his application was approved with  the
provisions that he must affiliate with the Air Force  Reserves  within
one (1) year from his separation date to maintain his  GI  Bill  under
the 2X4 program (enlistment for two years with an obligation to  serve
four years in the Selected  Reserve).   His  separation  was  for  the
convenience of the member and convenience of the government, was not a
reduction in force program, and was in accordance with the  applicable
regulation.  Accordingly, DPPRS recommended denial.

A complete copy of the DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 2 Nov
98 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________
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 probable error or injustice.  The evidence of  record
reflects that the applicant applied for transfer from active  duty  in
the Air Force  to  a  position  in  the  Selected  Reserve  under  the
provisions  of  the  Palace  Chase  program,   which   was   approved.
Accordingly, he was released from active duty under the provisions  of
AFI   36-3208   with   a   narrative   reason   for   separation    of
“Intradepartmental Transfer.”  He  now  requests  that  the  narrative
reason for his separation be changed to “Reduction in Force”  so  that
he may be eligible for the Montgomery GI Bill - Active  Duty  program.
The basis for his request is that he was denied  educational  benefits
under this program because did not enter the Selected  Reserve  within
the required 12 months.  However, he asserts that  he  was  unable  to
enter the Selected Reserve due to circumstances  beyond  his  control.
He further contends that he made several attempts to find  a  position
but to no  avail.   However,  notwithstanding  his  assertions,  after
reviewing the available evidence, we  are  of  the  opinion  that  the
applicant failed to  exercise  due  diligence  in  his  pursuit  of  a
Selected Reserve assignment.   Specifically,  the  evidence  indicates
that the earliest the applicant  contacted  a  Reserve  recruiter  was
December 96, more than 12 months after his release from  active  duty.
Therefore, in view of the above, and in the absence of  evidence  that
the applicant’s reason  for  separation  was  erroneous,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.  Nevertheless, if the applicant  can  provide  additional
supporting documentation of his attempts to obtain a Selected  Reserve
assignment, we may be inclined to reconsider his appeal.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 23 Mar 99, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Panel Chair
      Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
      Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Sep 98, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 21 Oct 98.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 2 Nov 98.




                                   PATRICIA J. ZARODKIEWICZ
                                   Panel Chair