RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02277
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His separation code be changed so that he may be entitled to educational benefits.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was never told that his discharge would result in the loss of his educational benefits.  He is now enrolled in an educational program and needs the benefits to avoid a debt.  

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release form Active Duty.  His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 29 May 96.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 23 Oct 97.  On 17 Feb 99, he was notified by his commander that he was recommending that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFPD 36-32 and AFI 36-3208, paragraph 5.65.  The specific reasons for his action was that on 22 Sep 97. 29 Apr 98, 11 Jun 98, and 12 Jan 99 he failed mandatory weight check/body fat measurements.  He received a letter of counseling and two letters of reprimand.  He acknowledged receipt of the notification on that same date.  He elected to waive his right to consult counsel and waived his right to submit a statement on his own behalf.  In a legal review of his case the wing staff judge advocate found the case legally sufficient.  The discharge authority concurred with the recommendation and directed that he be discharged without probation and rehabilitation and furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.  The applicant was discharged on 29 Mar 99, he served 2 years, 9 months, and 27 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAT reviewed applicant's request and states that Title 38, U.S.C. requires an individual seeking benefits to serve a specific amount of active duty and receive an honorable discharge.  Individuals discharged for weight control failure must serve a full term of service.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) may award benefits if an early separation is due to hardship, service-connected disability, a prior-existing medical condition, reduction in force, or at the convenience of the government.  Individuals separated for weight control do not fall into any of these categories.  The applicant served 2 years, 9 months, and 27 days of his 4 year active duty commitment, he did not complete enough service to qualify for Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits.  The DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPRS reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.  DPPRS states that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation; and, was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  The DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 30 Aug 02 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 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.  While the Board finds his desire to pursue a higher education commendable, the Board majority is not persuaded that a change to his narrative reason for separation and the corresponding separation code is warranted.  Evidence has not been presented that would lead the Board majority to believe that the actions taken against the applicant were improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in effect at the time.  Therefore, the Board majority agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopts their rationale as the basis for their conclusion that he has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, the Board majority finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-02277 in Executive Session on 17 Oct 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

By a majority vote, the Board recommends denial of the application.  Ms. XXXXXX voted to grant his request, but elected not to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Jul 02, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAT, dated 31 Jul 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 15 Aug 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 02.

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
               FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of 

	I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.

	Please advise the applicant accordingly.