RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00306
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document - Armed Forces of the United States be changed to reflect 6 years.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was not afforded the opportunity to enlist with the Missouri Air National Guard (MOANG) for six years.  

The recruiting office was not proactive to ensure that her enlistment would be for six years.  The applicant believes she should have been allowed to enlist for six years to qualify for an enlistment incentive. 

In support of her request, applicant provided copies of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and DD Form 4.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant served on active duty in the Regular Air Force from   18 May 03 through 30 May 08.  She was released from active duty and transferred to the MOANG under the Palace Chase program with a Military Service Obligation of more than 120 days.  Her DD Form 4 indicates she enlisted in the MOANG for a period of 1 year, and 29 months.  Applicant is currently serving in the California ANG.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1PS recommends denial.  A1PS states they concur with the Subject Matter Expert (SME) that there is no basis for the member’s complaint that substantiates an error or injustice.  The SME states the enlistment contract did not deny the member any benefits.  Additionally, because the enlistment was a Palace Chase commitment, the applicant was not eligible for any type of enlistment incentive regardless of the length of contract.

The complete A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 13 Feb 09, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 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-2009-00306 in Executive Session on 7 April 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member



The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2009-00306 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jan 09, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 6 Feb 09.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Feb 09.




								
								Panel Chair
2


3