RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01952
INDEX CODE: 128.05
COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 JAN 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment on 14 December 2005 be declared void and his 8 January
2002 enlistment be extended for 23 months.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was miscounseled when he was attempting to obtain the retainability
to attend Air Traffic Control, 1C1X1 Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC)
Technical training.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided four Memorandums of
Record, a Personal Data Sheet and a copy of his Retraining Counseling
Statement.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman first class
on 8 January 2002, for a term of four years and was progressively
promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt/E-5).
On 26 July 2005, he was approved for retraining into the 1X1X1 AFSC with
a class start date of 20 April 2006, and a graduation date of 21 June
2006. On 14 December 2005, he reenlisted for a term of four years for
retraining giving him a date of separation of 13 December 2009.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial. DPPAE states in part the applicant was
required to obtain 21-months of control duty assignment (CDA) rather
than 36-months CDA as previously stated in the initial advisory. A 23-
month extension would not have met the CDA requirements for the AFSC.
If the applicant would have failed to get the full CDA, his training
into the 1C1X1 AFSC would have been cancelled. After completing the
training and obtaining the required special experience identifier, the
applicant can reenlist in accordance with established procedures in the
1C1X1 AFSC and receive any authorized SRB payments at that time.
DPPAE’s complete evaluations, with attachments, are at Exhibit C and D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states he found a list of required CDA’s organized by
AFSC. The list is dated newer than AFI 36-2626, which states an
outdated requirement. He also included a memorandum from the Chief
Comptroller attesting to his contentions.
His complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.
A copy of the corrected Air Force evaluation, with attachments, was
forwarded to the applicant on 27 Nov 06, for review and comment within
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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. Applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, we found no evidence that the
applicant was miscounseled or that he has been treated any differently
than others who were similarly situated. We note the applicant was
required to obtain 21-months of CDA and a 23-month extension would not
have met the CDA requirements for Air Traffic Control retraining. If the
applicant had failed to get the full CDA, his retraining into the AFSC
would have been cancelled. Therefore, the applicant was required to
reenlist to obtain the CDA to retrain in the Air Traffic Control AFSC.
In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis
to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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-
2006-01952 in Executive Session on 17 January 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPEP, dated 11 Jul 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPEP, dated 27 Nov 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jul 06.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, 14 Aug 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Nov 06, w/atch.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05607
He was miscounseled when not told that he must reenlist before entering an extension, as well as, the 23 month extension was obligated service which would prevent him from reenlisting at a later time due to his high year tenure. On 31 March 2011, the applicants commander recommended approval of his request and his date of separation of 28 August 2012 was extended to 28 July 2014. While the applicant contends he was not offered the option to reenlist in March 2011 for the purpose of...
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. The applicant entered the Technical School at Keesler AFB, MS on 8 January 1986, to complete the Air Traffic Control Operator course E3ABR27230. This extension would normally satisfy the service retainability for retraining requirements only if the controlled duty assignment (CDA) for the ATC course was less than 23 months and technical school completion date was prior to his initial date of separation of 6 May 1986.
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1996-00383A
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His requested class date was based on his DEROS (date eligible for return from overseas) of April 1993, and using that date he would not have had the required 21 months retainability after completion of his technical school. The retraining was approved in April 1992 and he received the earliest possible training quota for AFSC 1C1X1. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His requested class date was based on his DEROS (date eligible for return from overseas) of April 1993, and using that date he would not have had the required 21 months retainability after completion of his technical school. The retraining was approved in April 1992 and he received the earliest possible training quota for AFSC 1C1X1. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04275
DPAA3 states that according to her performance reports and the letter from her commander, the applicant was assigned to Keesler Air Force Base (AFB), from November 2005 until she separated from active duty in March 2010. She was medically disqualified in March of 2010 and separated from active duty in August of 2010. Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 1 March 2012, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03595
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03595 INDEX CODE: 128.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: May 25, 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he reenlisted into the 1N531 (intelligence) Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) instead of the 3P071 (security forces) AFSC. AFPC Reenlistments advised the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02477
In support of his request, applicant provided a Sworn Statement from the Noncommissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC) Employments, Email Traffic Relating to Retraining, Phase II NCO Retraining Program Memorandum, Email Traffic from Air Force Contact Center, a copy of a X- Factor Letter, a Memorandum for Record from Applicant, Email traffic from NCOIC Employment and three Letters of Support from his Commanders. The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00226 INDEX CODE: 100.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be returned to his Primary Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of Security Forces Specialist (3PO51). As a result, he was approved for retraining into Personnel (3S0X1), an AFSC he did not request. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03802
According to AF Form 1411, Extension or Cancellation of Extension of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force, on 17 Mar 04, the applicant extended his 3 May 00 enlistment for 18 months for the purpose of having sufficient retainability for Career Airmen Reenlistment Reservation System (CAREERS) retraining into Air Field Management (AFSC 1C7X1). As pointed out by HQ USAF/JAA, the applicant is “better off” with the existing 17-month extension plus a four-year reenlistment, with a four-year SRB,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01147
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She came in the Air Force to perform in a particular Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC). After nearly two years of service, she was medically disqualified from the AFSC. Enlistment bonuses are recoupable provided the member is separating voluntarily, or is being separated for misconduct, or for other specified administrative reasons.