Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02603
Original file (BC-2003-02603.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02603
            INDEX CODE:  102.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  records  be  corrected  to  show  that  he  did  not  resign  his
commission.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he submitted his paperwork  for  separation  (AF  Form  780),  he
checked block 4a(3), requesting that he be given an Air Force  Reserve
commission.  He never wished to resign his commission, and  was  never
informed that his separation paperwork (DD Form 214) indicated that he
had resigned his commission.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, and copies of an AF Form 780, Officer  Separation  Actions,
and his separation documents.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force,
on 20 Jun 89.  He was voluntarily ordered to extended active  duty  on
15 Nov 89.  He was integrated into the Regular Air Force on 15 Feb 96,
in the grade of captain.

An AF Form 780 indicates that, on 21 Jul 99,  the  applicant  tendered
his resignation, requesting that he be  given  an  Air  Force  Reserve
commission.  The reason for the requested action was his completion of
his required active service.

Applicant was discharged from all appointments in the Air Force on  26
Jan 00 under the provisions of AFI  36-3207  (Completion  of  Required
Active Service) and was furnished  an  honorable  discharge.   He  was
credited with 10 years, 2 months, and 12 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRS recommended  denial  indicating  that  in  accordance  with
separation directives, Regular officers  are  discharged  and  Reserve
officers are released.  In order for a Regular officer  to  receive  a
Reserve commission after discharge, he/she must request a new oath (be
sworn-in) into the Reserve to be given  a  Reserve  commission.   Upon
review of the applicant’s record, it appears that he did not follow-up
with a new oath for commission, and at this time does  not  possess  a
Regular or Reserve commission.  His DD Form is correct and  no  change
is warranted.

A complete copy of the DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 3 Oct
03 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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's  complete
submission was thoroughly  reviewed  and  his  contentions  were  duly
noted.  However, we do not find  the  applicant’s  assertions  or  the
documentation  presented  in  support  of  his  appeal  sufficient  to
convince us that corrective action  is  warranted.   The  evidence  of
record indicates that the applicant tendered his resignation from  the
Regular Air Force and requested a Reserve commission.  However,  since
he was a Regular officer, he was discharged from all  appointments  in
the Air Force.  No evidence has been presented which would lead us  to
believe that his discharge was improper or contrary to the  prevailing
directives.  It appears that in order for him  to  receive  a  Reserve
commission, he will have to request an appointment into the Air  Force
Reserve, and we find no bar which precludes him  from  doing  so.   In
view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary,
we agree with the recommendation of the  OPR  and  conclude  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of establishing that he has
suffered either an error or an injustice.   Accordingly,  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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-02603 in Executive Session on 4 Nov 03, under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member
      Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jul 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 25 Sep 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Oct 03.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703444

    Original file (9703444.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant's MSD was recomputed to delete the constructive service credit changing his MSD of 8 July 2000 to 12 March 2001. The TYSD is established from the date of graduation, 8 June 1974, and includes 3 years, 3 months, and 27 days duplicated commissioned service time, 11 February 1971 - 8 June 1974, and 8 months, 3 days constructive credit, 8 June 1970 through 10 February 1971, per AFM 36-5, Table 2-3, Rule 7, and paragraphs 2-15 and 2-16. In view of the computations, we find’ no error...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03705

    Original file (BC-2006-03705.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His Officer Performance Report (OPR) dated 26 May 03 – thru 25 May 04 be removed from his records. On 7 May 04, the commander, ESC issued a LOR to the applicant. According to email traffic on file in his master personnel records, the question was brought up as to whether an individual can subsequently request an administrative change to an AF Form 780 to reflect he or she requested "I request release from active duty instead of "I hereby tender my resignation" as the applicant had requested.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803570

    Original file (9803570.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: While completing the required documents to be released from active duty in 1997, she was unaware as to the meaning of “resigning her commission” and being released from active duty. While she was requesting separation from active duty, she completed paperwork for a reserve assignment. Based on the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03387

    Original file (BC-2006-03387.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He be retired in the grade of captain (O3-E) effective 8 Jan 07, the date he will have eight years of commissioned service. Second, the timing of these statements are fatal to applicant’s claim that he relied on the alleged erroneous retirement pay advice he received from DFAS on 28 Oct 05, and from the DM retirement and benefits office on 4 Jan 06. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03735

    Original file (BC-2002-03735.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03735 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C,” “Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge: or entry level separation without characterization of service,” be changed to RE Code...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02421

    Original file (BC-2003-02421.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When she transferred from the Navy to the Air Force Reserve, she should have been credited for her DEP time, and that her pay grade should have reflected her prior enlisted service with 16 years of total credit toward pay. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPA indicated that administrative actions have been taken to correct the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00232_

    Original file (BC-2007-00232_.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00232 INDEX CODE: 110.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 JUL 08 ______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His undesirable under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge (UOTHC) be upgraded. A copy of the report was provided to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00867

    Original file (BC-2006-00867.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    As he had a one- day break in service, by regulation, he had to sell his leave as part of his out processing from the Regular Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant contends the Air Force forced him to take a break in service of one day thereby leading to his having to sell his leave prior to accepting an appointment in the ANG. Other officers hired after him from active duty have not had a break...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03464

    Original file (BC-2005-03464.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 14 August 1978 for a period of four years. On 24 February 1981, the applicant submitted an application to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting his under honorable conditions (general) discharge be upgraded to honorable. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02724

    Original file (BC-2003-02724.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received an honorable discharge and desires to reenter the Air Force. The reason for this action was because he failed his CDC on 20 June and 5 October 2001, scoring 64%, and 61% -- the minimum passing score was 65%. Additionally, we note that the applicant’s assigned RE code of 3A is a code that can be waived for prior service enlistment consideration, provided he meets all other requirements for enlistment under an existing prior service program.