RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03235
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive his full Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) with no deduction
for obligated service.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When he completed his extension of enlistment, he was not informed of the
provisions of executing an extension of enlistment. Furthermore, the
Military Personnel Flight (MPF) failed to counsel him on the impact his
extension would have on future SRB entitlements. In addition, the
extension document does not clearly explain how an extension affects SRB
entitlements.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of
senior airman (E-4).
On 9 April 1997, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a
period of four years, establishing his date of separation (DOS) as 8 April
2001.
On 27 March 2000, the applicant extended his 9 April 1997 enlistment for a
period of 8 months to obtain retainability for a Permanent Change of
Station (PCS) assignment. His DOS was adjusted to 8 December 2001.
On 9 November 2000, the applicant reenlisted in the Regular Air Force for a
period of 4 years and received a Zone A, Multiple 4.5, SRB. However, based
on his obligated service through 8 December 2001, he did not receive the
full SRB.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Skills Management Branch, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the application
and states that applicant initialed the counseling section of the extension
document indicating that he was aware and understood that he could reenlist
versus extend. He also initialed the portion of his extension advising him
that his Air Force Specialty Code is on the SRB skills list and he would
not be paid for the remaining portion of an unserved extension. The
evidence indicates the MPF advised the applicant on the option to reenlist
versus extend and that he understood the terms of the contract.
Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any evidence to substantiate
that the MPF failed to properly do their job despite his initials on the
extension document that indicates otherwise. Therefore, they recommend the
application be denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2 and 9
March 2001, for review and response within 30 days. However, as of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. After thoroughly reviewing the
evidence of record and noting the applicant’s contentions, we are not
persuaded the Air Force failed to counsel him on the impact his extension
would have on his entitlement to any future SRB. The applicant initialed
the counseling section of his extension document indicating that he was
aware, and understood, that he could reenlist versus extend. He also
initialed the portion of his extension document that advised him that his
skill was on the SRB skills list and he would not be paid for the remaining
portion of an unserved extension. Furthermore, he has not provided a
statement from an MPF representative to substantiate that he was
miscounseled. 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 18 April 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Panel Chair
Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Member
Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Nov 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 2 Feb 01.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 2 Mar 01.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Mar 01.
PATRICK R. WHEELER
Panel Chair
According to DPPAE, a review of the applicant’s case file indicated that the Military Personnel Flight erroneously indicated on the AF Form 901 that he was entitled to a Zone C, Multiple Three (3.0), SRB. Furthermore, we believe that the Military Personnel Flight had the responsibility of providing the applicant with the correct information. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the...
AF Form 1441 (Extension or Cancellation of Extensions of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve) has an additional extension counseling section which includes two statements which were not initialed by him indicating that he was not briefed this information. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the extension...
The applicant states that his MPF changed his reenlistment contract to reflect the increase in the SRB multiple and the Air Force should honor the contract. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Skills Management Branch, AFPC/DPPAE, reviewed the application and states that after further research concerning the reason for the change in the reenlistment document, the MPF advised that applicant’s contract was correct at the time of...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00287 INDEX CODE: 112.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 10 December 1998 10-month extension to her enlistment be cancelled and, she receive a Zone A Multiple 3.5, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) payment for five years and three months as stated on her AF Form 901, Reenlistment...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01813
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01813 INDEX CODE: 128.05, 112.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) be paid based on the full four years she reenlisted for on 23 Dec 04 and not be reduced by the time remaining on the 23-month extension she was...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was advised by a Military Personnel Flight (MPF) representative, that if volunteered for an overseas assignment and extended his current enlistment for a period of 36 months to obtain the required retainability, he would receive a Zone C Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) upon entering into the extension. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to the delay in receiving her In-place Base of Preference (IPBOP) assignment approval notification, she began her second extension of her current enlistment contract. We also believe that the MPF had ample time from the date of the assignment approval to provide the applicant the assignment notification and the applicant would have reenlisted on her previously established date of separation...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1999-00020
Effective 18 December 1998, 48 hours after she had reenlisted, paralegals in Zone A and B (2 to 6 years and 6 years to 10 years) were eligible for a reenlistment bonus. She was further informed that while the Reenlistment Section cannot know what will be on the SRB lists, it is and should be their responsibility to explain the SRB facts to all personnel reenlisting. Had the applicant been counseled concerning the release of a new Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) listing in December and...
Effective 18 December 1998, 48 hours after she had reenlisted, paralegals in Zone A and B (2 to 6 years and 6 years to 10 years) were eligible for a reenlistment bonus. She was further informed that while the Reenlistment Section cannot know what will be on the SRB lists, it is and should be their responsibility to explain the SRB facts to all personnel reenlisting. Had the applicant been counseled concerning the release of a new Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) listing in December and...
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.