RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01683
INDEX CODE: 102.07
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her date of rank (DOR) to staff sergeant (E-5) be corrected/adjusted to 1
March 1998.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She should be allowed a DOR adjustment based on previously serving as an E-
5 in the Regular Air Force. She contends that the governing regulation is
outdated and does not specifically address her situation as a disenrolled
cadet with prior service.
In support of her request, applicant provided a copy of her DD Form 214,
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, a copy of a letter
from AFPC/IG, a copy of Special Order AJ-157, a copy of AFI 36-2604,
Service Dates and Dates of Rank, and a copy of Interim Change Notification
2001-1 to AFI 36-2604.
Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 13 April 1990 and was honorably
discharged in the pay grade of E-5 after serving 11 years and 2 months
total active federal military service (TAFMS). On 16 August 2001, the
applicant enlisted with the Air Force Reserve for the sole purpose of
attending Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC). On 11 April
2002 member was disenrolled from AFROTC and on 7 July 2002 involuntarily
recalled to Extended Active Duty (EAD) for a period of 24 months to fulfill
a contractual military commitment.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPAEQ recommends denial. The DOR was computed in a fair and
equitable manner and within governing directives and Reserve
Contract. Recommend the applicant’s DOR remain 16 August 2001.
The DPPAEQ evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states that the OPR recommendation is not warranted. The
directive is outdated and does not address her situation. AFI 36-2604
states, “Former AFROTC cadets ordered to EAD under Title 10, USC., 2105 and
2107, keep the date of rank specified on their reserve enlistment
contract.” It implies that former AFROTC cadets did not have a previous
DOR. Eighteen or nineteen year old cadet disenrolled from AFROTC have to
give back time or money to the Air Force and have to be involuntarily
recalled to active duty. They have no DOR to reinstate. She has over
eleven years prior service and should not fall into that category. She was
only recalled to active duty because that is what the regulation stated.
The regulation is outdated and does not specifically address former AFROTC
cadets with prior service. Over the past few years there have been
numerous disenrolled former AFROTC cadets with prior service. It does not
seem fair that the regulation does not address this situation and just
arbitrarily take away the DOR that was worked so hard to attain.
Her complete submission is 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 error or injustice. The applicant contends that the governing
regulation AFI 36-2604 is outdated and does not specifically address her
situation. Nonetheless, it is the current governing authority that
outlines date of rank for disenrolled AFROTC cadets. Furthermore, evidence
has not been provided which would lead us to believe that the rules of the
applicable regulations were inappropriately applied or that she was denied
rights to which she was entitled. Therefore, we agree with the opinions
and recommendations of the Air Force offices 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. In the absence of
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2003-01683
in Executive Session on 5 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 May 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAEQ, dated 4Jun 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 03.
Exhibit E Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Jun 03.
VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02240
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. When a cadet is disenrolled or relieved from cadet status and transferred to the Air Force Reserves and ordered to extended active duty AFI 36-2502, states “Prior service disenrolled airmen receive their former grade and DOR with the effective date as the disenrollment date; second year disenrolled airmen receive the grade determined by AFI 36-2604.” AFI 36-2604, states “Former Air Force Academy cadets transferred to the...
In order to be discharged, she had to be legally and properly discharged. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit K. The Chief, General Law Division, HQ USAF/JAG, also reviewed the case and indicates applicant's contention that the discharge order was not effective until 27 June 1993 should be rejected because she had sufficient constructive knowledge of her discharge to make it effective 11 June 1993. Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03805
The complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her response to the Air Force evaluation, applicant reiterates her request to change her DOR to her original active duty date of 1 Jul 00 or in the alternative consideration for her time served in the Air Force Reserve. _____________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03963
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03963 INDEX NUMBER: 135.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) (E-5) with a date of rank (DOR) of 13 Nov 00 that he earned in the Air National Guard be established as the grade in which he was ordered to active duty. ...
Upon entering active duty, the applicant’s date of rank was established in accordance with AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, para 7.5.1. In this regard, the Air Force states that had the applicant entered active duty from civilian status some of her professional experience would have been used in computing her date of rank. The Board is of the opinion that the applicant’s date of rank was computed in accordance with existing regulations.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01381
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Prior to 1 Jul 92, 100% (day-for-day) service credit was earned by personnel completing the EDP. The governing Reserve AFI and the active duty instruction provide for the same result--half credit for the time the applicant spends in school. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant awarding the applicant 100% credit for time spent in...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02423
AFROTC is authorized up to 60 days to review all disenrollment investigations. e. The decision to call the applicant to EAD is not punitive in nature; rather, it is an activation of the voluntary commitment he made to the Air Force via the contract (AF Form 1056) he signed on 13 August 2008, in exchange for education and training benefits and the opportunity to earn a commission as an Air Force officer. In this respect, the majority notes the Holm Center/JA evaluation indicates the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01135
In support of her appeal, applicant provides a letter from her detachment stating that she disclosed her illness and medications before attending field training, a letter from her psychiatrist, copy of an e-mail message, and a letter from her AFROTC commander. On 15 Jan 03, a DD Form 785 was completed disenrolling the applicant from the AFROTC program effective 31 Mar 03 for medical disqualification by reason of bi-polar depression and failure to maintain military retention standards. We...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01900 INDEX CODE: 100 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His extended active duty (EAD) date be changed from 16 Mar 98 to 15 Mar 98 to allow him to request supplemental board consideration for promotion to the grade of captain. If his EAD was 15 Mar 98 instead of 16 Mar 98, he could request to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00850
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of E-3, with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 19 Apr 01. Air Force Instruction 36-2604, Service Dates and Date of Rank, stipulates that “Airmen in the following categories receive a DOR equal to the date of enlistment in the RegAF: Non-prior service enlistees (members who have served less than 24 months total active federal military service) or...