Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00094
Original file (BC-2003-00094.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00094

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The 13-month extension of her enlistment contract be voided so that she  may
separate.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her  reenlistment  contract  is  incorrect.   She  was  told  that  if   she
reenlisted for a 6-year term, that it would cancel out her extension.   That
information  was  incorrect,  the  extension  was   an   obligated   service
commitment.  This makes her  contract  incorrect.   She  does  not  wish  to
accomplish a new contract.  She wishes to separate.

In support of her request applicant provided a copy of  her  AF  Force  Form
901, Reenlistment Eligibility Annex, DD  Form  4/1,  Enlistment/Reenlistment
Document Armed Forces of the United States, and AF Form 1411,  Extension  or
Cancellation of Extension of Enlistment in the Regular Air  Force/Air  Force
Reserve.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air  Force  in  the  grade  of
senior airman.  On 14 July 2000, the applicant extended her  17  March  1997
enlistment for 13 months to qualify for an assignment.   On  11  July  2001,
the member reenlisted for 6 years.


On 26 August 2002, the  commander  imposed  nonjudicial  punishment  on  the
applicant because of divers occasions, from on or about   2 January 2002  to
on or about 25 April 2002, she was derelict  in  the  performance  of  those
duties in that she willfully failed to discharge her duties  as  Unit  Leave
Monitor by altering her leave forms and the leave forms of other members  in
the squadron.  The commander imposed punishment consisting of  reduction  to
the grade of airman first class, suspended until  28  February  2003,  after
which time it  will  be  remitted  without  further  action,  unless  sooner
vacated, a forfeiture  of  $150  of  her  pay.   Reprimand.   The  applicant
indicated that she  would  appeal  and  submit  additional  matters.   On  9
September 2002, the commander denied her appeal.  The Article 15  was  found
legally sufficient on 3 October 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE  recommends  denial  and  states  that  member  signed  a   valid
reenlistment form and entered a valid reenlistment  under  the  policy  that
was in effect at the time.  The Full Enlistment Program went into effect  in
June 2001 and policy did not allow for grandfathering of anyone affected  by
the changes in this program.  This  program  stated  that  all  airmen  will
serve their current obligated service and any  additional  enlistment  would
be added to this obligated service.  At the time, the member reenlisted  (11
July 2001), airmen were allowed to reenlist for 6 years  and  the  obligated
service would be incorporated into their  existing  enlistment.   As  member
did not receive a Selective Reenlistment Bonus for  this  reenlistment,  she
was not penalized monetarily under this program.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  14
February 2003 for review and comment 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the  evidence
of record and applicant’s submission, we are  not  persuaded  that  her  13-
month extension  should  be  canceled.   Applicant  contends  that  she  was
miscounseled concerning cancellation of  her  13-month  extension  when  she
reenlisted 11 July 2001.  However, she  has  failed  to  provide  sufficient
documentation to support her allegation.  It appears that  applicant,  based
on her allegation of miscounseling, wants  her  ll  July  2001  reenlistment
voided so that she can separate.  As  stated  above,  we  find  no  evidence
showing that she has been the victim of either an  error  or  an  injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the  contrary,  we  find  no  basis
upon which to recommend favorable action on this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of a 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-2003-00094
in Executive Session on 6 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
                 Mr. Vaughn Schlunz, Member
                 Ms. Mary J. Johnson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Dec 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 3 Jan 03.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.






      ROSCOE HINTON,JR.
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • 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-2002-03913

    Original file (BC-2002-03913.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he was required to extend his current enlistment for 18 months to meet the service obligation for an in-place overseas tour, he requested to extend to his high year of tenure date (HYTD) of 8 April 2007. The applicant’s HYT as a Master Sergeant, at the time of his extension, was 8 April 2007 (24 years). _________________________________________________________________ The following members of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01813

    Original file (BC-2005-01813.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01885

    Original file (BC-2003-01885.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The extension was not cancelled per his request. They indicated that on AF Form 1411, section VIII, the applicant initialed the block that states “I understand if the original reason for which I extended is cancelled, I may request cancellation of this extension provided I have not entered it. The evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 11 June 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02161

    Original file (BC-2005-02161.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-00187

    Original file (BC-2003-00187.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, applicant’s medical condition was considered restricting and required an Assignment Limitation Code C. Applicant was not mobility qualified. The evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPAMM indicates that the applicant has had chronic leg pain since basic training. It is fair to note that at the time of her separation, there were no limitations on her assignability by the Medical Standards Branch.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02754

    Original file (BC-2003-02754.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02754 INDEX CODE: 112.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS: A constructive reenlistment to change his term of enlistment (TOE) from six to four years. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00195

    Original file (BC-2003-00195.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She requests consideration for either a bonus for prior service or a reenlistment bonus. There has not been a program in place since 1990 that allows prior service members to reenlist and receive a bonus. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01747

    Original file (BC-2003-01747.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a 15 Nov 02 letter to the applicant, the Superintendent of the --rd Wing IG with the Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) advised that, following an interview, the briefer denied having the conversation with the applicant and asserted she had briefed countless individuals regarding declination statements and was well aware of the ramifications. The handout directed him to the MPF for counsel if his desire was to separate. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • 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...