RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2002-02341
            INDEX CODE 0202341
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her records reflect two years of inactive  Reserve  service  performed
after her first enlistment (2 Sep 75 - 31 Aug 79).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When she separated after her first enlistment in 1979,  she  was  told
she was not completely released from the Air Force and she  needed  to
keep her uniforms because she was obligated to the Air Force  for  two
more years in the inactive Reserves.  Documentation for  the  inactive
Reserve  service,  which  she  incurred/served  following  her   first
enlistment, is now missing. However, two years  of  inactive  military
service are indicated on the DD Form  4  for  her  second  enlistment,
which started on 28  Mar  83.  Some  type  of  source  document  which
reflected her prior military service (active and inactive) had to have
existed  at  the  time  of  her  second  enlistment;  otherwise,   the
individual completing the DD Form 4 could not have included it in  her
reenlistment document. She believes she is entitled to  credit  for  a
two-year military service obligation (MSO) as a result  of  two  years
spent in the inactive Reserves.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 8 Apr 75, the applicant signed a DD Form  4,  Enlistment  Contract,
which committed her to six years in the Air Force Reserve.

On 2 Sep 75, she entered  active  duty,  signing  another  DD  Form  4
committing her to four years on active duty. On 31  Aug  79,  she  was
honorably discharged from active duty for expiration of term
of service with four  years  of  active  service.  When  a  member  is
transferred to the Reserves, the DD Form 214 will reflect  “USAFR”  in
Block 9, Command to Which Transferred, and “Release from Active  Duty”
in Block 25, Type of Separation. Blocks 9 and 25 on the applicant’s DD
Form 214 reflect “Not Applicable” and “Discharge,” respectively.

According to HQ AFPC/JA,  at  the  time  of  this  enlistment,  female
enlistees did not incur an MSO under the law in existence at that time
(Title 10, USC, Section 651). The law was later changed  and  after  1
Feb 78, female officers and enlisted  incurred  a  six-year  MSO  upon
entering active duty. This change did not apply to the applicant.

On 28 Mar 83, the applicant reenlisted in the Air Force. The DD Form 4
she signed at that time  credited  her  with  two  years  of  inactive
military service. The applicant remained  on  continuous  active  duty
until her retirement in Jan 03.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/JA believes that when the applicant signed the new DD  Form  4
contract in Sep 75, which  obligated  her  to  four  years  of  active
service, it superceded the previous DD Form 4 signed  in  Apr  75  and
essentially released her from her six-year contract with the Air Force
Reserve. Accordingly, when she was discharged four  years  later,  she
incurred no MSO beyond her four years of active duty service. Assuming
the applicant’s memory of her 1979 separation briefing is correct, the
person giving the briefing was merely mistaken. This  purported  error
may have occurred as a result of the change in the law which  occurred
in 1978, after her entry into active duty. Under that change,  a  six-
year MSO would have been authorized for females who were enlisting  in
the Air Force by the time the applicant separated in 1979 but not  for
those, like the applicant, who enlisted prior to 1978.   The  1983  DD
Form 4 erroneously reflected  a  credit  for  two  years  of  inactive
military service that she never served. This document, unlike  the  DD
Form 214, is not considered a source document that can be relied  upon
to reflect the  applicant’s  prior  service.  The  applicant  has  not
provided, nor does the Personnel Center have in  its  possession,  any
authoritative source document that shows she served these two years of
inactive service. They conclude only one error occurred in this  case.
That is, the 1983 DD Form 4 should not have reflected two years served
in the inactive Reserve. Her DD Form 214 does not show a  transfer  to
the Reserves, and the law authorizing females to incur a six-year  MSO
was not effective until 1978. Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 7 Mar 03 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. After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence  of  record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that her  records  should  reflect  two  years  of  inactive
Reserve service performed after her first enlistment. The  applicant’s
contentions  are  duly  noted;  however,  we   do   not   find   these
uncorroborated  assertions,  in  and   by   themselves,   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by  the  Air  Force.  We
therefore adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our  decision
that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered
either an error or an injustice. In  view  of  the  above  and  absent
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we conclude this appeal should be
denied.

_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 17 April 2003 under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair
                 Mr. Robert H. Altman, Member
                 Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-02341 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Jul 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/JA, dated 28 Feb 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.




                                   ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR.
                                   Panel Chair