RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03517
INDEX CODE: 135.03
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 Oct 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive active duty service credit for two years (1979-1981) of Air
Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) time while he was a
member of the Simultaneous Membership Program (SMP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Air Force has either lost or destroyed his records, which would
show that he was compensated for his drills. He should not be
penalized for something that was not his fault. He claims he
discovered the error in Jan 05 when he became aware of the SMP concept
while on active duty in the US Army.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Air Force for six years on 5 Aug 75 and
was administratively separated with an honorable discharge on 6 Aug 79
to enroll in an AFROTC program at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
Troy, NH. He was enrolled in his AFROTC program from 7 Aug 79 to
13 May 81. Since he had two years remaining on his six-year
enlistment contract when he separated to attend advanced training, the
applicant was placed on an inactive enlisted Reserve status during his
two-year AFROTC program. After successfully completing the program,
the applicant was honorably discharged from USAFR enlisted status on
13 May 81, and was commissioned as a 2nd lieutenant in the Air Force
Reserve (USAFR) on 14 May 81.
The applicant entered extended active duty on 9 Oct 81. He was
promoted to the permanent grade of captain effective and with a date
of rank (DOR) 26 Jul 85. On 28 Jan 87, the applicant voluntarily
tendered his resignation with a requested effective date of 13 Jun 87.
However, on 27 Apr 87, he accepted a date of separation of 10 Jun 87,
under the Fiscal Year 1987 (FY87) Early Release Program. On 10 Jun
87, the applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of captain
under AFR 36-12, Voluntary Resignation, 7-Day Option provision, after
9 years, 8 months and 3 days of active service.
On 21 Oct 99, the AFBCMR denied the applicant’s 30 Apr 98 appeal (BC-
1998-01357) to be either retired or reinstated with no time lost and
all back pay.
On 9 Jan 06, HQ AFPC/DPPOAR wrote the applicant clarifying the SMP
(Exhibit C). They explained the SMP allows a contracted ROTC cadet to
serve in an Army Reserve or National Guard unit as an officer trainee.
SMP cadets receive on-the-job training, monthly drill pay equivalent
to an E-5 (sergeant), and time in service for pay and retirement
purposes. SMP contracts with the Army require cadets to complete Army
ROTC first. However, this program does not exist in the Air Force.
The applicant responded on 27 Mar 06 (Exhibit D), indicating he wanted
to proceed with his DD Form 149 application. He added he was told he
would get active duty credit for his ROTC time once he completed it.
He claimed the class before him received active duty credit for their
Reserve time and contended the fact that he would have been returned
to active duty had he not successfully completed ROTC supported his
point.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPOAR recommends denial. The SMP allows participation in
ROTC and enlistment in the Army National Guard or Reserve at the same
time. Students in SMP serve as officer-trainees in a Guard or Reserve
unit and perform duties commensurate with the grade of 2nd lieutenant.
The SMP does not exist in the Air Force.
A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/DPPOAR evaluation is at Exhibit E.
HQ AFPC/JA recommends denial on the basis of untimeliness; the
application also fails on the merits. The applicant’s claim he was a
member of the SMP while in the AFROTC is specious; the program does
not exist in the Air Force. Although the applicant alleges the Air
Force lost or destroyed his pay records, presumably establishing he
performed Reserve duty contemporaneously with his AFROTC enrollment,
his Air Force Reserve retirement points summary proves otherwise.
Based on cited statutes, the applicant is barred from counting the
period of his inactive Reserve service during his AFROTC tenure in
computing the length of his active duty service.
A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant contends he is no longer pursuing the “SMP avenue.” He
still believes that his ROTC time should be counted toward active duty
once he completed the program, as he was told.
A complete copy of applicant’s response is at Exhibit H.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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
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. The SMP does not exist in the Air Force and,
during the period in question, the applicant was an AFROTC cadet and
not a member of the Army National Guard or Reserve. Further, as noted
by HQ AFPC/JA, statute bars the applicant from counting his inactive
Reserve service during his AFROTC tenure as credit for active duty
service, and he has not shown he performed Reserve duty
contemporaneously with his AFROTC enrollment. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this appeal.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application in
Executive Session on 22 August 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Robert H. Altman, Panel Chair
Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-03517 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Nov 05, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAOR, dated 9 Jan 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 27 Mar 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAOR, dated 4 May 06.
Exhibit F. Letter, HQ AFPC/JA, dated 19 May 06.
Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 May 06.
Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Jun 06.
ROBERT H. ALTMAN
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02517
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that he agrees with AFPC’s summary of his basis for request except for their final statement, “…there was a delay in signing the required paperwork needed to make the correction to his DIEUS.” He states, actually, there was an AFROTC-induced delay in processing his four-year scholarship award delaying his...
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 | CY2003 | bc-2002-02911
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2002-02911 INDEX CODE 100.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reason for disenrollment from the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) be changed to “Cadet is disenrolling on grounds of his homosexuality and the military’s current stance on...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02040
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02040 INDEX CODE: 100.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 November 2007 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The debt incurred as a result of his disenrollment from the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) be waived. On 1 August 2005, his detachment commander advised him...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01454
The complete AFROTC/CC evaluation is at Exhibit D. Holm Center/JA recommends deny, stating, in part, changing the date of contracting via the DD Form 4 signed in 1980 will not affect the date the applicant entered Federal service, that date is the day he was commissioned in 1982. In addition, active Federal service does not begin at the time the AF Form 1056, AFROTC contract and associated DD Form 4 is signed, but rather upon commissioning. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02140
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02140 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) debt that he incurred as a result of his disenrollment be cancelled. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the Air Force office of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02408
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states through her grandfather she was medically qualified for a commission in the Air Force, based on the physical examination conduced on 16 January 2004. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant’s Grandfather, undated.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04570
On 28 Apr 1981, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserves. JA states per the Air Force Records Information Management System, Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-Type Training records are destroyed after three years. The final disenrollment decision, made by HQ AFROTC, would have considered any response provided the applicant.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03587
However, they do recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to show that the time of his disenrollment he was on conduct probation not academic probation. HQ USAFA/JA opines the applicant was not prejudiced by the error and that the applicant was disenrolled for his Wing Honor Code violations The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s counsel states in his response that...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02457
The Superintendent, the disenrollment authority, agreed with the CSRP and disenrolled the applicant, ordered him to reimburse the government for the costs of his Academy education by serving three years active duty in an enlisted capacity, but also granted him an educational delay to seek a commissioning source other than the Academy. As noted above, the Superintendent determined that the applicant should reimburse the government for the costs of the Academy education by serving in an...