Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02757
Original file (BC-2002-02757.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02757
            INDEX CODE:  112.07
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The six (6) month extension to her enlistment be cancelled.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The applicant feels that the  extension  should  have  been  cancelled
because she no longer needed the additional retainability.  She states
that while stationed at Osan AB, Korea, she extended her enlistment in
order to obtain  service  retainability  for  a  permanent  change  of
station to Hickam AFB, Hawaii.  This extension added six (6) months to
her enlistment.  She departed Osan AB, Korea  earlier  than  expected,
due to an unforeseen pregnancy and arrived at Hickam AFB, Hawaii on 17
February 2000.  The applicant feels that the initial justification for
the six-month extension was no longer valid.  She states that  at  the
time of the extension she was not informed of all  options,  including
cancellation time constraints imposed upon her should the reasons  for
the extension no longer exist.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant currently serves in the grade of Senior  Airman  and  is
stationed at Hickam  AFB,  Hawaii.   The  applicant  extended  her  17
February 1999 enlistment in  November  1999  for  six  (6)  months  to
qualify for the assignment to Hickam AFB, Hawaii.

Data extracted  from  the  Military  Personnel  Data  System  (MILPDS)
currently shows that the applicant reenlisted on 20 August 2002 for  a
term of four (4) years.  This BCMR application was filed  on  26  June
2002.  The applicant’s extension documentation cannot be located.  The
applicant was contacted several times and asked to provide a  copy  of
the extension documentation, however she has not responded.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE indicates  that  an  extension  to  an  enlistment  can  be
cancelled only if the reason  for  the  extension  no  longer  exists.
Since the member was reassigned to Hickam AFB, Hawaii from  Osan  AFB,
Korea, the extension remained valid.  Even  though  member  no  longer
needed as much retainability due to an early departure, this does  not
negate the extension.  DPPAE states that there is no reason to  cancel
the  extension  because  member  did  change  duty  stations.    DPPAE
recommends the applicant’s request be denied.

The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
17 Jan 03, for review and comment within 30 days.  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 an  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  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 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  02-02757
in Executive Session on 26 February 2003, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Member
                 Mr. Albert J. Starnes, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jun 02.
      Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 9 Jan 03.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jan 03.





      CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00642

    Original file (BC-2004-00642.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00642 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 23-month extension of his enlistment contract and his original date of separation be restored. In this respect, the majority of the Board notes that the applicant executed an extension contract on 14 March 2002 for a period of 23...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02408

    Original file (BC-2004-02408.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    To accept the assignment, she extended her enlistment by 17 months. After notification, she had to reenlist for four years in order to accept the assignment. 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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01295

    Original file (BC-2003-01295.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her original reporting date was 31 Dec 01 which required a DOS of 16 Jan 04. PCS retainability requirements are determined by the assignment RNLTD. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2003-00133

    Original file (FD2003-00133.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CASE NUMBER AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD DECISIONAL RATIONALE FD-2003-00133 GENERAL: The applicant appeals for upgrade of discharge to honorable. The characterization of the discharge received by the applicant was found to be appropriate. (Atch 1d) e. On or about 3 January 2002, you used provoking words towards Al Coa and you assaulted her by striking her in the face, pulling her hair, and spitting at her.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03891

    Original file (BC-2002-03891.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03891 INDEX NUMBER: 112.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The extension of her enlistment she entered into on 13 Dec 01 be corrected to reflect inclusive dates of 5 Jul 04 to 4 Jan 05. ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS...

  • AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2006-00044

    Original file (FD2006-00044.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant had further misconduct and received his first Article 15 for failure to go to appointed place of duty. to wit: "to report to the First Sergeant's 05, Osan AB, Korea - Article 86. I am recommending y o u discharge from the United States Air Force based,upon a Pattern of Misconduct, Conduct Prejudicial to Good Order and Discipline, The authority for this action is AFPD 36-32, Military Retirements and Separations, and AFI 36-3208, Administrative ' ~eparation of Airmsn, Chapter...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0000906

    Original file (0000906.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00288

    Original file (BC-2004-00288.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She received an assignment notification to Incirlik ABS, Turkey, and was advised that she would have to extend for 14 months to obtain retainability for this assignment. On 15 August 2003 the applicant reenlisted in the United States Air Force for a period of 4 years and 18 months. DPPAE’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00163

    Original file (BC-2003-00163.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Failure to cancel the extension within the 30-calendar day limit will be considered a willingness on my part to serve out the extension.” The applicant’s 30 days to cancel the extension began the day his assignment to Kadena AB was canceled; therefore, he should have had enough time to cancel the extension within the time limit. The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03449

    Original file (BC-2003-03449.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    AFBCMR BC-2003-03449 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: APPLICANT Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the...