RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01086
INDEX NUMBER: 128.08
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show that he was eligible for separation pay at
the time of his honorable discharge on 5 April 2001.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Since he was ineligible to reenlist due to four weigh-in failures under the
Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP), he should have received
separation pay for an E-5, with over 13 years of service. He received
numerous punishments for his WBFMP failures, i.e., Letter of Counseling,
Letter of Reprimand (LOR), Referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), and
lost line number to E-6.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant contracted his initial enlistment with the Air Force on 9
March 1988. He contracted his last reenlistment on 6 January 1995, for a
period of 6 years. He was progressively promoted to the grade of staff
sergeant. A Report of Individual Personnel (RIP), dated 1 February 2000,
indicates he was ineligible for promotion based on a weight status code of
2 (unsatisfactory). He extended his enlistment on 11 September 2000, for a
period of three months. Based on his unsatisfactory progress in Phase I,
of the WBFMP, he received a referral EPR, closing 17 November 2000, and an
LOR. He was honorably discharged on 5 April 2001, under the provisions of
AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Active Service), and issued an RE code of “4J.”
He completed 13 years and 27 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
AFPC/DPPAE states, in part, that the RE code of 4J issued at the time of
his discharge accurately identifies him as being in Phase I of the WBFMP
and ineligible to reenlist.
The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that
the applicant was voluntarily separated on his ETS and separation pay is
not authorized. AFPC/DPPRS further states that since the applicant was
being honorably discharged with an RE code of “4J”, he would have been
eligible to one-half separation pay, if he had requested an extension of
his enlistment and the request was denied. However, there is no evidence
he requested an extension of his enlistment to complete the WBFMP and his
request was denied.
The AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 30 April 2004 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 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 agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Separations Branch and adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
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 BC-2004-01086
in Executive Session on 21 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 19 Apr 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 27 Apr 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Apr 04.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01988
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His former rank should be reinstated because his demotion was solely based on his alleged failures in the Weight and Body Fat Measurement Program (WBFMP) and his medical history clearly demonstrates that his medical condition inhibited his ability to control his weight and successfully complete the WBFMP. He received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for his second failure on 5 November 1999, which was...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03142
However, on 27 Aug 01, the squadron commander reported to the Wing IG he was considering removing the applicant as NCOIC of the Hydraulics shop because he was inciting his personnel over the manning issue and continuing to complain about it outside the rating chain. The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. AFPC/JA recommends the LOR administered to the applicant on 25 Mar 02, the EPR rendered on him closing 19 Jul 02, and the AF Form 418 be voided and removed from his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01146
On 1 Apr 98, the member was entered into the Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP). Applicant was honorably discharged on 21 Dec 99, in the grade of airman first class, under the provisions of AFI 36- 3208, by reason of weight control failure. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 6 Aug 04, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02787
If time had been taken prior to enlistment to verify his body fat percentage he would have known that he did not meet Air Force standards. DPSFOC states in accordance with AFI 40- 502, Weight and Body Fat Measurement Program, weight measurements will be administered prior to processing personnel for promotion and body fat measurements will be administered when a member exceeds the MAW. DPPAE states that like all members of the Air Force, the applicant received briefings in Basic Military...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04247
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSFOC states that they e-mailed the applicant on 21 January 2004 and requested she provide either a copy of her WBFMP case file or a letter of support from her commander detailing how she was unfairly treated while on the WBFMP. Since her record does not contain a letter from her commander recommending promotion to SRA, they must conclude that her promotion remained in withhold status. ...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-01818
DPF states her case file shows no evidence the applicant was directed to weigh-in regardless of her menstrual cycle prior to 10 February 2003; therefore, they recommend denial of her request to upgrade her EPR closing 25 January 2003. Accordingly, it is recommended the record should be corrected as indicated below. Exhibit H. Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 8 Nov 05.
Promotion eligibility is regained only after receiving an EPR with an overall rating of “3” or higher that is not a referral report, and closes out on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) for the next cycle. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. The Chief, Performance Evaluations Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP, also reviewed the appeal and notes the Medical Consultant’s review of the applicant’s medical condition. A complete copy of the evaluation...
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-04111
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04111 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The “JCR” (Weight Control Failure) separation program designator (SPD) code he received be fixed or upgraded so he is not required to pay back the bonus he received when he enlisted in the Air Force. ...