RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
          AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS




 IN THE MATTER OF:     DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02079
            INDEX CODE:  100.00


            COUNSEL:  NONE


            HEARING DESIRED:  NO




 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:


 The separation code of JBK (Completion of Required Active  Service)
 on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active
 Duty) be changed to LCC (Reduction in Force <Full Separation  Pay>)
 to match the reason for separation (Completion of  Required  Active
 Service) and that she be entitled to full separation pay.


 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:


 Since she completed her active service,  she  should  be  paid  her
 entire separation pay instead of only half.   Her  separation  code
 should be changed to  allow  entrance  into  the  Reserves  if  she
 chooses to enter the Reserves.


 Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.


 _________________________________________________________________


 STATEMENT OF FACTS:


 The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD)
 was 25 Sep 85.


 Applicant’s Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) profile follows:


             PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION


               24 Sep 86                    9
               24 Sep 87                    9
               30 Jun 88                    9
               30 Jun 89                    9
               31 Mar 90                    4 (New rating system)
               31 Mar 91                    5
               29 Jul 91                    5
               29 Jul 92                    4
                1 Dec 92                    5
                1 Dec 93                    4 (Referral Report)
                1 Dec 94                    5
                6 Aug 95                    5
                6 Aug 96                    5
               18 Jul 97                    5
               18 Jul 98                    5
               18 Jul 99                    5


 On 21 Dec 99, she was discharged  from  the  Air  Force  under  the
 provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required  Active  Service)
 with a separation code of JBK and a reenlistment  eligibility  (RE)
 code of 4J (Entered into Phase I of the Weight Program, or the unit
 commander declared the  airman  ineligible  to  reenlist)  with  an
 honorable  characterization  of  service  in  the  grade  of  staff
 sergeant.  She was credited with 14 years, 2 months, and 27 days of
 active service.


 On 30 Mar 01, the applicant’s  DD  Form  214  was  administratively
 corrected to reflect N/A in Item 6 (Reserve Oblig. Term. Date), and
 the words “Member  is  subject  to  recall  and/or  annual  records
 review” were deleted from Item 18 (Remarks) (see Exhibit C).


 _________________________________________________________________


 AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


 The Special Programs & AFBCMR Manager, AFPC/DPPAES,  reviewed  this
 application and indicated that a review of  applicant’s  case  file
 revealed the RE code of “4J” is correct.


 A complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  is  attached  at
 Exhibit D.


 The Military  Personnel  Management  Specialist,  AFPC/DPPRS,  also
 reviewed this application and  indicated  that  the  applicant  was
 given the correct separation code of JBK as required by  Department
 of Defense (DOD) and Air Force directives.  She was assigned an  RE
 code of 4J which made her not fully  qualified  for  retention  and
 therefore  only  entitled  her  to  one-half  separation   pay   as
 authorized by law.


 A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.


 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


 Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and disagreed with the
 decisions for many reasons.  She stated, in part,  that  she  is  a
 person who stands up for what is right, no matter  the  consequence
 and this fact caused her commander  a  lot  of  embarrassment.   He
 wanted her to compromise her integrity and she refused so he  found
 a weakness in  her  health  and  used  it  against  her.   It  took
 Headquarters AETC Inspector General (IG) from Oct 99 to Feb  00  to
 make a final decision and they decided that she had not proven that
 her commander had misused  his  power.   Secondly,  since  she  had
 already completed her enlistment term, she was extended  while  the
 IG conducted their investigation.  She states that because  of  her
 commander’s many friends on base (everyone is aware  of  the  “good
 old boy network” that exists among commanders), she was  told  that
 she had to separate because  her  enlistment  was  completed.   She
 could not reenlist or  do  anything  until  the  investigation  was
 finished, which, as she stated, took until Feb 00.  This was  truly
 a time of putting “service before self.”  She knew no  matter  what
 happened, she could not continue working  for  him.   This  is  the
 reason that she believes she is entitled to all of  her  separation
 pay.  Her DD Form 214 also states that she has a three-year Reserve
 obligation which seems to contradict the  code  of  4J  (not  fully
 qualified for retention).   If  she  is  not  fully  qualified  for
 retention, then how  could  she  still  have  an  inactive  Reserve
 obligation until Dec 2002?


 Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit G.


 _________________________________________________________________


 ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


 The Assistant NCOIC, Separations Branch (AFPC/DPPRS), reviewed this
 application and indicated that the applicant received a  separation
 code of JBK - Completion of Required Active Service and an RE  code
 of 4J - Entered into Phase I of the Weight  Program,  or  the  unit
 commander declared the airman ineligible to reenlist.  These  items
 were both reviewed before and the recommendation was to  disapprove
 her request.  The applicant, however, served over  eight  years  of
 service and thus completed her Reserve obligation date.  Based upon
 the documentation in the file, DPPRS  believes  the  discharge  was
 consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of  the
 discharge regulation.  Additionally, the discharge was  within  the
 sound discretion of  the  discharge  authority.   Applicant’s  case
 remains the same in that no  specific  errors  were  found  in  her
 discharge processing.  However, her DD Form 214 will  be  corrected
 to delete her Reserve obligation date and the recall to active duty
 statement in the remarks section.  After a thorough review  of  the
 applicant’s personnel/medical records, AFPC/DPPAES has  reconfirmed
 the RE code “4J” is correct.   Her  enrollment  in  the  Air  Force
 Weight Program upon discharge is well documented.  DPPRS recommends
 applicant’s records remain the same.


 A complete copy of the additional Air Force evaluation is  attached
 at Exhibit H.


 _________________________________________________________________


 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


 Applicant reviewed the additional Air Force evaluation and strongly
 disagrees with the advisory opinion.  She  states,  in  part,  that
 first, she completed her enlistment prior to  her  separation  (Oct
 99).  AETC/IG allowed her to be extended until 21 Dec 99 because  a
 decision had not been made on  her  IG  complaint.   Her  commander
 never completed  the  proper  form  denying  her  reenlistment  and
 allowing her to challenge this decision.  Another  thing  that  she
 disagrees with is the fact that the advisory  opinion  claims  that
 her enrollment in the  Weight  Management  Program  (WMP)  is  well
 documented.   This  is  not  quite  true.   It  was   very   poorly
 documented.  Some of the documents have another individual’s social
 security number on it and her name.  Another fact is that she never
 had the required three unsatisfactory weigh-ins provided in the Air
 Force instruction.  This is why she feels she was singled out.  She
 believes that the most important thing is that she did complete her
 enlistment and this is why her records should  be  corrected.   The
 documents  she  enclosed  are  samples   of   poor   documentation.
 Throughout a very strong career, especially as  an  evaluator,  she
 has always strived to do the best job possible.


 Applicant’s complete response, with  attachments,  is  attached  at
 Exhibit J.


 _________________________________________________________________


 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 concerning
 the applicant’s  separation  code  and  separation  pay.   After  a
 thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record   and   applicant’s
 submission, the applicant has provided no evidence showing that her
 separation  code  is  in  error  or  contrary  to  the   prevailing
 instruction or that she is entitled to  full  separation  pay.   We
 note that she was assigned an RE code of  4J  which  made  her  not
 fully qualified for retention and therefore only  entitled  her  to
 one-half separation pay.  In addition,  we  noted  the  applicant’s
 contentions regarding her WMP records.  While some of the documents
 contained an incorrect social security number,  she  did  sign  the
 forms.  Therefore, we must presume that these  records  pertain  to
 her participation in the WMP.  In view of the foregoing and in  the
 absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,   we   agree   with   the
 recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale  expressed
 as the basis for our decision that  the  applicant  has  failed  to
 sustain her burden that she has suffered  either  an  error  or  an
 injustice.  Therefore, we find no  compelling  basis  to  recommend
 granting the relief sought.


 4.   Applicant asserts that  there  seems  to  be  a  contradiction
 between the RE code of 4J (not fully qualified for  retention)  and
 the Reserve obligation reflected on her DD Form 214.   However,  we
 note that her DD Form 214 was administratively corrected to  delete
 her  Reserve  obligation  date  and  the  recall  to  active   duty
 statement.


 5.   Should applicant choose to enter the Reserves, we  remind  her
 that if she meets all other enlistment criteria, her recruiter  may
 submit a request for waiver of the RE code through  the  recruiting
 channels.


 _________________________________________________________________


 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 3 July 2001, under the provisions of Air Force
 Instruction 36-2603:


                  Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
                  Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member
                  Ms. Olga Crerar, Member


 The following documentary evidence was considered:


      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jul 00, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 30 Mar 01, w/atch.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAES, dated 28 Aug 00.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 Sep 00.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Sep 00.
      Exhibit G.  Letter fr applicant, dated 3 Oct 00.
      Exhibit H.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 26 Apr 01.
      Exhibit I.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 11 May 01.
      Exhibit J.  Letter fr applicant, dated 14 May 01, w/atchs.






                                    HENRY ROMO, JR.
                                    Panel Chair