RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-03111
INDEX CODE: 128.05
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment date be backdated to 8 November 1999.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has over 10 years Total Active Military Service (TAFMS) effective 9
November 1999. In order to comply with requirements, he would like to
receive a waiver to the three-month requirements so that he can reenlist
prior to 9 November 1999. He would like to reenlist on 5 November 1999,
which would be 14 months prior to his current expiration of term of service
(ETS). Although a “Zone B” bonus exists, it is not his only motive for
early reenlistment. The career field is currently experiencing heavy
losses of native “2MOX3” NCOs. His early reenlistment will help the Air
Force maintain corporate knowledge and experience in the ”2MOX3” career
field until the influx of NCOs acquire the necessary training and field
experience.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, a
statement from his commander, dated 22 September 1999, and a statement from
the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) Commander, dated 22 September 1999.
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 January 1989, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the
grade of airman basic for a period of four (4) years.
On 17 February 1993, applicant reenlisted in the grade of senior airman for
a period of 4 years, contracting his last enlistment on 6 January 1997, in
the grade of staff sergeant for a period of 4 years.
Applicant’s Current Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) is “2M053.”
In accordance with AFI 36-2602, Reenlistment in the United States Air
Force, Table 3.8, second-term or career airmen are allowed to reenlist only
if within the three months of their expiration of term of service (ETS).
On 9 November 1999, applicant’s Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB)
entitlement expired when he reached 10 years of service.
Applicant’s ETS is 5 January 2001.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Skills Management Branch, Directorate of Personnel Program
Management, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed this application and states that there is
no basis to establish a precedent in this instance. He has provided no
evidence to substantiate error or injustice nor inconsistencies in the
application of the Air Force’s early reenlistment policies. Therefore,
they strongly recommend denial of applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant reviewed the evaluation and states that the staff sergeant
referenced in his attachments requested an exemption to policy for early
reenlistment, prior to his ten-year mark, to enable him to obtain a SRB and
his request was granted. Just as in his case, the NCO’s original
reenlistment date would have been well beyond his cutoff date for a Zone B
SRB. They are in the same command, career field, and are both Quality
Assurance Evaluators in the Logistics Group. Because the service dates in
both cases match so closely, and with an identical SRB available to both
members, he feels a serious injustice has been done in his case.
Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 probable 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 recommendations of the Air Force 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 probable 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 17 May 00, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Douglas J. Heady, Panel Chair
Ms. Peggy Gordon, Member
Mr. Laurence Groner, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Nov 99, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 14 Feb 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 25 Feb 00.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Mar 00, w/atchs.
DOUGLAS J. HEADY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02994
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02994 INDEX NUMBER: 128.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted the Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), 4N051, Aerospace Medical Service Journeyman. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03180
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reenlistments section did not allow him to reenlist in the allotted 30- day window after completing retraining and receiving his 3-skill level in accordance with Air Force instructions and reenlistments continuity book. DPPAE explains at the time he graduated from retraining, the applicant had to meet the reenlistment eligibility window requirement of three months prior to expiration of term of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03159
According to HQ AFPC/DPPAE (Exhibit C), effective 5 Mar 04, the Air Force reduced the reenlistment window from 12 months to three months prior to a member’s ETS. As the Air Force announces SRB changes, affected personnel are given at least 30 days prior to the effective date of the SRB changes to reenlist. Eligibility is based on the policies in effect at the time the member reenlists.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03397
He graduated from technical training school on 7 April 2004, and after inquiring about reenlisting, was informed the rules had changed and he was not eligible to reenlist, because he was not within three months of his date of separation (DOS). His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E _________________________________________________________________ ADDITONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAF/JAA reviewed a similar application and provided an advisory which indicates in...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00803
DPPAE states that when the Air Staff reduced the reenlistment window from 12 to 3 months and deleted the SRB in his career field, the applicant was not eligible to reenlist. Evidence indicates that the applicant was not eligible to reenlist on or before the date the Air Force reduced the reenlistment window from 12 months to 3 months on 5 March 2004 because his 12-month prior-to-ETS date was 13 March 2004. _________________________________________________________________ The following...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01074
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the RE code issued at the time of his discharge was either in error or unjust. While the AF Form 418, denying...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the RE code issued at the time of his discharge was either in error or unjust. While the AF Form 418, denying...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01939
Therefore, the first date that the applicant was eligible for reenlistment was 1 May 2004. Evidence supports that even though the applicant was eligible to reenlist upon receiving his 3-skill level in June 2003, it appears his action to delay his reenlistment until March 2004 was solely his own choice. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 15 September 2004, under the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02161
On 7 April 2004 applicant applied for a CJR and was approved on 14 April 2004. DPPAE states effective 29 April 2004, the applicant’s SRB was deleted and she was not eligible to reenlist at that time to receive the SRB due to her not being within 3 months prior to her expiration term of service (ETS). After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the applicant should be given the relief requested.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01296
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPPAE recommends the applicant’s request be denied. DPPAE states the applicant failed to comply with NCORP requirements and, as such, the RE code of 3E is correct. _________________________________________________________________ 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...