RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01103
INDEX CODE: 110.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. He be allowed to reenlist in the Air Force Reserve for four years so he
may be retirement eligible.
2. He be promoted to technical sergeant (E-6) or master sergeant (E-7)
with back pay and allowances.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has tried to reenlist in the Air Force Reserve from the Army National
Guard; however, the Air Force Reserve recruiters made false statements
about his record and discharge.
In support of his request, applicant provides a personal statement, copies
of correspondence from Air Force Reserve officials and copies of document
from his master personnel record.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 7 February 1979, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve in the
grade of airman first class (E-3). At that time, he was credited with
prior service in the U.S. Navy from 27 December 1968 through 26 December
1972 when he was discharged in the grade E-3. The applicant was
progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). Applicant
received three AF Forms 910, TSgt, SSgt and Sgt Performance Report, in
which his overall evaluations were 8, 6, 9 (9 being the highest rating) and
an AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report, in which his overall
evaluation was a 3 (5 being the highest rating). Based on the ANG/USAFR
Point Credit Summary prepared on 16 March 1991, the applicant's last
documented participation with the Air Force Reserve was on 6 February 1990
and at that time he was credited with 16 years, 1 month and 1 day of
satisfactory Federal service.
Based on the Army National Guard Current Annual Statement prepared on 7
July 1992, applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 14 December
1990 and was honorably discharged effective 13 December 1991.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFRC/RSO recommends denial. RSO advises the applicant initially sought
reenlistment back in 1991 but was ineligible for enlistment. The applicant
has exhausted all avenues to qualify for enlistment and retirement with the
Air Force Reserve. The AFRC/RSO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant states he feels he was wrongfully treated. He believes he should
have been given the opportunity to finish his career and retire, obtain the
rank and back pay he could have received by being an active member of the
Air Force Reserve. Applicant's complete response 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 a careful review of the applicant’s
submission, we found no evidence to indicate his disqualification for
reenlistment in the Air Force Reserve was inappropriate or unjust. It
appears that the crux of his argument is his allegation that Air Force
Reserve recruiters made false statements about his record and discharge in
an effort to prevent his reenlistment in the Air Force Reserve. He
provides no convincing evidence to support this claim. The actions taken
by the Air Force Reserve recruiters appear to have been within their
discretionary authority and the applicant was afforded appropriate
reenlistment consideration. We are in complete agreement with the Air
Force assessment on this matter and adopt their conclusions as our findings
in this case. Other than his own self-supportive statements, neither does
the record reveal nor has he provided any documentary evidence, which
successfully refutes the Air Force opinion concerning the propriety of the
actions taken. Accordingly, we are not inclined to favorably consider the
applicant’s request for reenlistment or to be promoted to technical
sergeant (E-6) or master sergeant (E-7) with back pay and allowances.
_________________________________________________________________
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 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 2006-01103
in Executive Session on 21 September 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Chair
Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2006-
01103 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/RSO, dated 8 Jun 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Aug 061.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 31 Aug 06.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC--2006-01920
Regardless of her educational level or the number of college credits at the time of her enlistment, she was not authorized to enlist at a grade higher than E-1. Headquarters AFRC records of bonus listings only go back to 1987; however, there were no bonuses or advanced pay grade for enlistment into critical AFSC’s in 1979 either. RSO states that, based on the information they have reviewed, there is no evidence to award the applicant a higher enlistment grade.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005--00757
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00757 INDEX NUMBER: 145.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 JUL 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he was disability discharged with severance pay rather than retired and transferred on the Reserve Retired List on 1 November 2003, awaiting...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03128
In support of his application, the applicant provides a personal statement; and copies of training orders, personnel brief, medical records, and numerous memorandums/letters/e-mails concerning his FFD evaluation, PEB findings, and his administrative discharge. DPZ states the administrative LOD paperwork, filed in the applicant’s military medical records, documents his head injuries on 8 April 2004 and indicates he inflicted the injuries upon himself. The DPPD evaluation, with attachments,...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | bc-2006-01066
He told the recruiter he had a year with the US Army Reserve and a year with the Coast Guard Reserve that had not been counted. Had the Records Center been able to provide the documentation three years earlier, he would have been able to enlist in the AFR and would now be serving with over 18 years towards a Reserve retirement. He contends he had served 15 years of satisfactory service in 2003 when he tried to reenlist with the Air Force Reserve.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02044
The following is a resume of the applicant's recent EPR profile: PERIOD ENDING PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION 7 Jun 99 4 7 Jun 01 4 3 Jun 02 3 _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/DPM reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial. Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that his commander abused his discretionary authority or that his decision not to recommend the applicant for promotion was based on...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03083
On the date of enlistment, the applicant did not have enough college credits to qualify for a higher enlistment grade. At this time, Recruiting Operations initiated an inquiry into his enlistment processing. AFRCI 36-2001, Air Force Reserve Recruiting Procedures, Table 5-1, Note 5 states: Documents presented after enlistment may be used as a basis for changing the authorized enlistment grade up until the individual’s Basic Military Training graduation date.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00505
He missed over three years of participation due to his service connected conditions; however, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) has so far approved restoring 2 ½ years of his pay, allowances, and participation points from his previous application (AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2006-01369). In support of his application, the applicant provides two personal statements, a letter of command support, response to Congressional Inquiry, AF/JAA legal review, Line of Duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00043
On 14 Jun 95, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, with service characterized as general (under honorable conditions), and was issued a reenlistment eligibility status of “Ineligible.” Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided an investigative report which is attached at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/JAJ recommends that no...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00909
The ARPC/A1B complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFCAF/PS has stated that after a review of the Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS), the applicant’s security clearance eligibility is coded as “Loss of Jurisdiction,” not suspended. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jun 07. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFCAF/PS, dated 14 Aug 07.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01402
AFPC/DPPPEP's complete 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 23 June 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the...