RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04001
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
During three years of his enlistment, weight standard checks were never
performed properly and everything was taken care of on paper, with everyone
passing. However, prior to his promotion to the grade of senior airman (E-
4), there was a change in command and he failed Air Force weight standards
and his promotion was withheld.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 8 July 1981 for a period
of four years.
On 29 June 1984, his weight was 224 pounds, which exceeded the maximum Air
Force weight standard of 205.
On 10 August 1984, he was placed on the Weight Management Program (WMP).
In a letter, dated 18 September 1984, the commander notified him that his
promotion to the grade of senior airman, that was to be effective on 1
October 1984, was being withheld because he was on the WMP.
The commander denied him award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM)
for the period 8 July 1984 to 13 January 1985.
On 14 January 1985, the applicant received a referral Airman Performance
Report (APR) for the period 5 May 1984 through 14 January 1985, because the
report contained comments regarding his unsatisfactory progress on the WMP.
He was honorably discharged on 5 July 1985, for expiration of term of
service and was issued an RE code of 4J (Entered into Phase I of the Air
Force Weight Management Program, or the unit commander has declared the
airman ineligible to reenlist for a period of Phase II or probation). He
completed 3 years, 11 months, and 28 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that
after enrollment in the WMP due to his failure to maintain weight
standards, the applicant consistently failed to maintain weight standards
leading to a referral APR and promotion withhold status. He states that
his weight was incorrectly checked until it was time for him to be
promoted. However, his records do not indicate that his weight case was
incorrectly processed.
The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation 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 28 February 2003 for review and response within 30 days. However, 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the available
evidence of record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find
no evidence of error or injustice. In this respect, the discharge appears
to be in compliance with the governing regulation in effect at the time of
his separation. The applicant has provided no evidence to indicate that
his separation was inappropriate. His assigned RE code of 4J accurately
reflects that he was enrolled in the Weight Management Program (WMP) at the
time of his separation. Furthermore, RE code 4J is a code that can be
waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided applicant meets
all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service
program. Whether or not he is successful will depend on the needs of the
service and there is no guarantee that he will be allowed to return to any
branch of the service. Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied
rights to which entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to disturb the
existing record.
_________________________________________________________________
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 BC-2002-04001
in Executive Session on 8 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Dec 02, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 21 Feb 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Feb 03.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
The disease was not taken into consideration despite medical documentation and testimonies of Air Force medical providers. The disease is recognized and treated worldwide; however Air Force medical providers failed to provide her relief from the signs and symptoms of the disease which led to her failure to comply with Air Force weight standards. On 21 January 1997, the applicant’s body fat measurement was 31% and her promotion to staff sergeant was approved with an effective date of 28...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04054
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04054 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her reentry code of 4J (entered into Phase I of the Air Force Weight Program, or the unit commander has declared the airman ineligible to reenlist for a period of Phase II or probation) on her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03270
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03270 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His honorable discharge be corrected to reflect that he received a medical disability discharge. After 13 June 1986, there are no records of low back pain. At the time of his discharge, he was in the weight management program, and his reenlisted code of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03071
He was considered by Physical Evaluation Board and was advised by his counsel that the PEB decision "would not be in his best interest" and he was returned to duty. The Medical Consultant quotes the presumption of fitness as stating "active duty members who develop medical problems...". The board did not give favorable consideration to any evidence presented on his behalf including 18 years of outstanding service, medical records diagnosing bulging discs with radiating pain, and the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00934
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPR states they were unable to verify the applicant’s entitlement for the AFAM. He was requested to provide a copy of the special order awarding the AFAM; however, he did not respond. However, should the applicant provide a copy of the special order awarding the AFAM or the original citation to the AFAM, this Board would be willing to review the materials for possible reconsideration.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02562
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRS states based on the fact applicant was serving in the grade of airman first class and had completed over 31 months of active duty, she was ineligible to reenlist or extend her enlistment. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02203
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02203 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of 4J (Entered into Phase I of the Air Force Weight Program, or the unit commander has declared the airman ineligible to reenlist for a period of Phase II or probation) be changed to a “3J”...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00907
On 26 Nov 97, the applicant was furnished a honorable discharge with a narrative reason for separation of Completion of Required Active Service, along with a separation program designator (SPD) code of KBK (Completion of Active Service) and RE code of 4J. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE states the RE code he received of "2Y" is correct and this code indicates the applicant was a second term or career airman who was denied an appointment to noncommissioned officer (NCO) status, or his NCO status was vacated. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.