RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00198
		INDEX CODE:  112.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  18 JULY 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of 4B be changed.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her discharge solely because she once weighed over the standards is unjust.  In addition, it is unfair that she can never return to the Air Force, especially when she knew people who were 50 plus pounds over their maximum weight with no medical problems and they are still in the military.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of her DD Form 214.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 March 1999 for a period of four years.  She was promoted to the grade of airman first class on 30 July 2000.  She received one Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 22 October 2001, in which the overall evaluation was “4.”

The applicant’s commander notified her that he was recommending discharge for failure to make satisfactory progress in the Air Force Weight and Body Fat Management Program (WBFMP).  The commander recommended that applicant receive an honorable discharge based on the following:

DATE                WEIGHT/BODY FAT    GAIN/LOSS    REMARKS

24 Oct 00           141 lbs/32%                     Entry into WBFMP
 6 Dec 00           147 lbs/34%        +3/+2%       Letter of Counseling
 9 Jan 01           150 lbs/35%        +3/+1%       Letter of Reprimand
27 Mar 01           149 lbs/35%        +1/+1%       Letter of Reprimand
10 Oct 01           150 lbs/34%        +4/+1%       Initiated Discharge Action

Applicant acknowledged receipt of the notification of discharge and after consulting with legal counsel indicated she would not submit statements in her own behalf.  The base legal office reviewed the case, found it legally sufficient to support separation and recommended applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.  The discharge authority approved the separation and directed applicant be discharged with an honorable discharge without probation and rehabilitation.

Applicant was separated from the Air Force on 1 February 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen (weight control failure), with an honorable discharge.  She had served 2 years, 10 months and 1 day on active duty.  She received a reenlistment eligibility code of 4B.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS states that the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation.  The discharge was within the discretion of the discharge authority.  Applicant received the correct separation code (JCR - weight control failure) and reentry code (4B - separated (honorably) for exceeding body fat standards.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 March 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response 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.  Evidence has not been provided showing the applicant’s discharge and the corresponding RE code she received were erroneous or unjust.  Other than her own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence leading us to believe the information in the discharge case file was erroneous, her substantial rights were violated, or her commanders abused their discretionary authority.  In the absence of such evidence, we have no basis on which to favorably consider 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 this application in Executive Session on 27 April 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		 Panel Chair
		 Member
		 Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, undated, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 28 Feb 05.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Mar 05.

				
					Panel Chair