RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00011
            INDEX CODE:  110.03, 131.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  She be reinstated onto extended active duty (EAD) and allowed to  enlist
under the Prior Service Program with a conditional release from HQ ARPC.

2.  She receive all back pay, allowances, leave, privileges and benefits.

3.  She receive 32 months of constructive service credit.

4.  Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from  Active  Duty,
be corrected to show that she was released from active duty  on  31  Aug  99
and that item 28 be changed to reflect "Released from active duty."

5.  Her pay records  be  corrected  to  show  that  on  1  Sep  99  she  was
authorized  payment  of  $1,395.92  and  that  she  was  relieved   of   her
indebtedness.

6.  She be promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant.

7.  Her Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) rendered for the period  12  Apr
99 through 20 Aug 99, be removed from her records.

8.  She be allowed to file for award of punitive  and  compensatory  damages
in civil court.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was recalled to EAD for a period of 36 months  on  12  Apr  99  and  was
separated on 20 Aug 99.  The separation was processed under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen without approval of  the
Secretary of the Air Force, without cause, without due process,  without  an
opportunity to be heard by a board of military  officers,  and  without  her
consent;  in  violation  of  established  laws,   rules,   regulations   and
procedures.  She was notified of her separation on 13 Aug 99, the  date  she
returned to duty following 2 weeks  of  convalescent  leave.   She  was  not
allowed to out process at  base-level,  she  was  not  allowed  to  complete
medical treatment for known medical  ailments,  and  was  not  provided  the
standard medical and dental final examinations.  In addition,  she  received
no transitional assistance to aid in future employment.  She was accused  of
breaking several punitive articles of the Uniform Code of  Military  Justice
(UCMJ).  Her commander did not  pursue  the  concurrence  of  the  convening
authority because the charges could not be corroborated.  Once  notified  of
her pending discharge she requested a board hearing but was refused  by  her
commander.  No charges were  preferred  against  her  and  she  received  no
punishments for the alleged misconduct.  She  was  improperly  removed  from
her duty section and  reassigned  as  a  receptionist.   The  actions  taken
against her were profoundly discriminating in nature and were in  breach  of
her Air Force contract.

In support of her request, applicant provided a personal statement,  a  copy
of her DD Form 214, documentation associated with her separation  processing
actions, documentation associated with her indebtedness to  the  government,
her Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) testing  notification,  extracts
from  her  medical  records;  and  copies  of  AF  Forms  1271,  Record   of
Assistance.  Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 Apr 78 and was  transferred
to the Air Force Reserves on 20 Apr 87.  She was voluntarily ordered to  EAD
on 12 Apr 99, for a period of 36 months.  An amended order was completed  on
12 Aug 99 changing her time on active duty from 36 months to 4 months and  8
days.  She was released from active duty on 20 Aug 99.

The applicant received $2,017 in advance pay.  At separation she still  owed
$1,344.64 for the advance pay.  She received a regular  end-of-month  active
duty payment for 16-31 Aug 99 but was only entitled to pay  from  16-20  Aug
99.  She was credited for 8.5 days of lump sum leave reducing  that  portion
of her debt to $447.36.

On 23 Jul 99, the applicant filed a complaint with the  Inspector  General's
(IG) office at Randolph AFB, TX.  The applicant made  14  allegations,  each
of which were found  unsubstantiated  by  the  investigating  officer.   The
report of investigation is attached at Exhibit J.

The additional corrections to her DD Form 214  requested  by  the  applicant
have been administratively corrected.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DFAS-DE/FYCC states public law authorizes the waiver of  erroneous  payments
of pay and allowances to military members.   Her  indebtedness  for  advance
pay is not the result of an  erroneous  payment  and  is  not  eligible  for
waiver consideration.  The  debt  of  $477.36  because  of  an  end-of-month
overpayment is eligible for waiver consideration.  If  the  applicant  would
have applied for a waiver of that portion of her debt, her request  probably
would have been denied based on the documentation in the debt file.   It  is
her responsibility to ensure  she  is  paid  correctly  and  to  report  any
discrepancies to the proper officials.  For her failure to  do  so,  she  is
not without fault in the matter.  The DFAS-DE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPEP states that there were no EPRs generated during  the  period  12
Apr 99 to 20 Aug 99.  The DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPRS states that she provided no facts  warranting  a  change  in  her
narrative reason for separation.  She was recalled to active duty on 12  Apr
99 for a period of 36 months (unless sooner  relieved).   An  amended  order
completed on 12 Aug 99 changed her time on active duty from 36 months  to  4
months and 8 days.  Her new date of separation (DOS) was set for 20 Aug  99.
 Her DOS is  correct  and  her  narrative  reason  is  correct.   The  DPPRS
evaluation is at Exhibit E.

AFPC/DPPPWB states that there are no provisions for an  automatic  promotion
to senior master sergeant.  If she had remained on  active  duty  she  would
have been considered for the 00E8, 01E8, and 02E8 cycles  provided  she  was
recommended by her commander and was otherwise eligible.  She was  scheduled
for promotion testing on 8 Nov 99 for the 00E8 cycle but  was  separated  on
20 Aug 99.  The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit F.

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial of the applicant's  request  for  reinstatement
onto active duty.  DPPAE states that the Air Force leadership exercised  the
authority as stated on her recall order to relieve her early  from  her  EAD
tour based on documented/developing pattern of substandard  behavior  within
months of her recall.  She failed to  provide  documentation  to  adequately
refute the pattern of behavior that led to her early release from EAD.   The
action allows her the opportunity to  continue  military  service  with  her
Reserve  component  and  avoid  further  disciplinary  action  (to   include
discharge).  The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that the leave  and  earnings  statement  for  August  1999
shows that DFAS had first-hand knowledge of the overpayment for  the  period
of 1-20 Aug 99.  The statement shows pay inclusive of  16-20  Aug  99.   She
owed the government $1,344.64 for advance pay at  the  time  of  separation;
however, lump sum leave and pay should have covered the advance pay.   On  1
Sep 99, $1,395.92 was deposited into her checking account.   The  government
forced her into indebtedness and this "bad debt" now appears on  her  credit
report.

DPPAE states that there is no documentation to support  her  appeal.   There
is none because the law is the documentation.  There is not a  provision  in
any statutory authority to relieve curtail,  or  release  any  member  early
from EAD before the expiration of term of service except prescribed  by  the
Secretary of the Air Force, by sentence of court martial,  or  as  otherwise
prescribed by law.  According to  DPPAE  an  entry-level  separation  is  an
everyday occurrence for an E-7 with a combined total of active and  inactive
service of over 21 years.  Prior to EAD she spent  133  continuous  days  on
active duty.   The  context  of  these  events  appear  to  imply  "at  will
termination," a practice that is strictly prohibited in  the  armed  forces.
She volunteered to serve a 36-month tour and was  subsequently  relieved  on
11 Apr 99 from Reserve assignment with ARPC.  The AF Form 526  she  provided
shows her  being  discharged  from  Reserve  affiliation.   The  applicant's
complete submission is at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

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  are  not
persuaded by her  contentions  that  the  administrative  actions  taken  to
release her from active duty were beyond her commander's scope of  authority
or that the commander  abused  her  discretionary  authority  in  doing  so.
Regarding  her  request  for  promotion,  we  agree  with  the  opinion  and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility  and  adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that she has  not  been  the
victim of an error or injustice.  We carefully considered her  request  that
she be relieved of her indebtedness to the government.  It appears that  her
debt was the  culmination  of  an  advance  payment  and  unearned  pay  and
allowances that she received.  Evidence has not been presented  which  would
lead us to believe that she should be relieved of her  obligation  to  repay
the Government.  We considered her request that any  EPR  rendered  for  the
period 12 Apr 99 through 20 Aug 99 be removed from her records; however,  we
note that no reports were rendered for that period, and accordingly,  action
on that portion of  her  request  is  not  necessary.   Since  this  Board's
charter  extends  solely   to   the   correction   of   records,   favorable
consideration of her request that she  be  allowed  to  file  for  award  of
punitive  and  compensatory  damages  in  civil  court  is   not   possible.
Accordingly, in the absence of persuasive 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  02-00011  in
Executive Session on 12 Feb 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
      Mr. William H. Anderson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Dec 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, DFAS-DE/FYCC, dated 27 Mar 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 2 May 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 4 Apr 02.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 16 Apr 02.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 28 Aug 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Sep 02.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Oct 02.
    Exhibit J.  IG Report of Investigation - WITHDRAWN




                                   ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
                                   Panel Chair