RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02089
INDEX CODE: 135.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be credited with completing two years of active duty in the Air Force
Reserve or a note in the remarks section of her DD Form 214 be made
indicating she completed four years in the Air Force Reserve.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On 28 July 1982, she enlisted in the Air Force under the Delayed Entry
Program and on 23 November 1982 she entered active duty. She volunteered
for and was released under the PALACE CHASE program. Consequently, her
military service obligation was extended from two to four years. On 14
September 1984, she was released from active duty. On 22 November 1988,
she completed her military obligation and was honorably discharged from the
Air Force Reserve.
In support of her application, she provides a personal statement, a copy of
her DD Form 214 and a copy of her AFRES Form 116, Request and Authorization
for Discharge and Enlistment/Reenlistment of Air Force Reserve Airmen. Her
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
__________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Records indicate that on 14 September 1984, the applicant was honorably
released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve in the
grade of senior airman (E-4) under the provisions of AFR 35-46 (PALACE
CHASE). At the time of her release she had served 1 year, 9 months and 22
days on active duty. Attempts to obtain Air Force Reserve records
pertaining to the applicant were unsuccessful.
__________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRSR recommends the application be denied. DPPRSR states that
service in a Reserve component does not constitute regular active duty.
The AFPC/DPPRSR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant requests that the Board review her case as a unique situation.
She is requesting credit for her active duty time served while in the Air
Force Reserve. Applicant’s letter 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. After reviewing the evidence of record,
we are not persuaded the applicant’s records are in error or that she has
been the victim of an injustice. Then, as now, the governing regulation
provided for the issuance of DD Forms 214 to document completion of periods
of active duty service that met the requirements set forth in the governing
regulation. Based on the above, adding any service performed subsequent to
14 September 1984 to her DD Form 214 issued on that date would be
inappropriate. Had the applicant completed any subsequent active Reserve
service that met the statutory and regulatory requirements, she should have
been issued additional DD Form(s) 214 for those periods of service. Other
than her own assertions, she has provided no evidence indicating Air Force
Reserve authorities erred by not issuing additional DD Form(s) 214. In
view of all the above, an in the absence of evidence by the applicant
showing the contrary, her request for additional active duty service credit
is not possible.
__________________________________________________________________
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 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 14 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas C. Markiewicz, Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2004-02089:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 June 2004, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 3 Aug 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Aug 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Aug 04.
THOMAS C. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03576
DPP states that since the applicant never enlisted with the --- ANG or any other ANG unit she cannot be re-instated. DPPRSR states that the PALACE CHASE program requires the member to sign a contract in which the member agrees to serve two times whatever is currently owed to the Air Force in an Air Reserve Component unit. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Apr 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02810
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02810 INDEX CODE 128.10 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: A pro-rated portion (approximately $666.67) of his original enlistment bonus be refunded. Information about PALACE CHASE is provided with the applicant’s military personnel records at Exhibit B. Recommend disapproval of his request...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01971
He transferred into Palace chase and is performing the exact Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) that he performed for more than six years while on active duty. He served 3 years, 6 months and 27 days in the regular Air Force. 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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-00790
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He requested a PALACE CHASE transfer from active duty approximately 9 August 2004 and enlisted in the National Guard on 5 January 2005 as outlined in the Force Shaping guidelines. Even though the evidence does not establish that the actions taken by Air Force officials were improper at the time of the applicant’s PALACE CHASE application, we find it difficult to believe the applicant would not have...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01788
His application was processed and approved with a date of separation of 30 October 2002 and a PALACE CHASE contract expiration date of 10 March 2007. The AFPC/DPPRSP evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 1 August 2003 for review and comment (Exhibits D). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01871
In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy a personal statement, copies of AF Forms 1288 (Application for Ready Reserve Assignment) and a 29 June 2004 letter requesting a date of separation under PALACE CHASE. DPPRSR states the applicant’s AF Form 1288, dated 30 March 2004, is dated after the Force Shaping Phase I program ended. JAMES W. RUSSELL III Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-01871 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His nonselection was erroneous and unjust because he was forced to compete against officers who had unauthorized and illegal stratified “Top Promote” (TP) recommendations on their Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs). The PRF considered by the board had an overall recommendation of “Promote.” On 13 Mar 95, he voluntarily applied to separate under the provisions of the PALACE CHASE program. Even if...
He be released from his PALACE CHASE contract and resignation from the Air Force. In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement and other documentation Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, PALACE CHASE, HQ AFPC/DPPRSR, reviewed this application and states that applicant denies knowledge of recoupment action prior to separation; however, on 8 May 1997, he signed a...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01296
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01296 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed from Miscellaneous/General Reasons to Palace Chase. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The narrative reason for separation is incorrect as she went through the Palace Chase program under the 2014 Limited Active Duty Service Commitment (LADSC) Waiver Program. We took notice...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03679
DPM states the applicant voluntarily did not complete his term of enlistment; therefore, SRB termination and recoupment is mandatory. The DPPRSR evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He feels he is due the SRB money for his EAD time in the Reserve and while on his AGR tour because he has continued to serve in the 1C6XX career field. Even though he is in the Air Force Reserve, he is still...