RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00192
XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her reenlistment documents be changed to the correct date so
that she will be entitled to a Zone A, Selective Reenlistment
Bonus (SRB).
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her retraining package was erroneously disapproved. She
believes had she been approved for retraining in the
May/June/July 2008 timeframe, she would have extended to meet
the retraining retainability requirements, went to technical
school, and then reenlisted in the SRB career field.
She should have been advised to submit a waiver so that she
could reenlist after completion of retraining into the SRB
career field.
She should have been given a higher priority for retraining
since she has a Special Duty Identifier (SDI).
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides three DD Forms
149, Application for Correction of Military Record; a copy of
her letter through her Member of Congress; a copy of her
retraining package and additional supporting documents.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant extended for 14 months to accept an assignment
overseas in Sep 05. This established her Date of Separation
(DOS) as 23 Nov 08. Since first-term airmen are only limited to
23 months total in extensions during their first enlistment, she
only had 9 months left as a first-term airman and would have had
to reenlist to secure the approved retraining.
She applied for retraining, on 7 Mar 08, and only listed/applied
for one career field (6C011, Contracting); after being initially
denied, the applicant reapplied for retraining and was approved
for retraining in the 6C011 career field on 25 Feb 09.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial, stating, in part, the applicant is
seeking approval based on AFPC erroneously disapproving her
Mar 08 retraining application; however, they note the
applicants consideration for retraining was properly
administered and the actions completed correctly. In fact, even
if the applicants Mar 08 retraining could have been approved,
she would not have been able to extend her enlistment, but would
have to reenlist in order to obtain the required retainability.
DPSOA provided a letter to the applicant to ensure that she
understood the policies governing retainability requirements for
first-term airman and that she was not eligible for a
retainability suspense waiver.
In addition, although the applicant contends that she should
have been given a higher priority based on her Special
Experience Identifier (SEI) not being updated, this is not true;
her application was considered correctly and she was not
selected. Also, AFPC Retraining worked with everyone in the
8M000 Postal career field that didnt have a secondary career
field to ensure they were afforded every opportunity to retrain
into an available career field if they desired.
The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 1 Oct 10 for review and comment within 30 days. 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. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. In view of the
above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-00192 in Executive Session on 24 March 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated, 17 Dec 09 and 8 Jul 10
with attachments.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 2 Sep 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Oct 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04548
According to the applicants AF Form 1411, Extension or Cancellation of Extensions of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force (REGAF)/AIR Force Reserve (AF Reserve)/Air National Guard (ANG), dated 25 Jun 13, the applicant requested cancellation of her 26 months extension for the purpose of immediate reenlistment in order to receive a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03826
On 19 Jan 10, the applicant was counseled by Military Personnel Flight (MPF) via the AF IMT 1411, Extension or Cancellation of Extensions of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve on his extension request and his available options. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates his argument that he was miscounseled when told he...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01890
His extension was processed for 44 months, which included the time needed to complete his technical training plus an additional three years of retainability. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Exhibit D. Letter,...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03105
Then she found out she had been miscounseled and had actually been eligible to reenlist in Jun 11. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends partially granting, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02961
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After completing the Return to Duty Program (RTDP) and being accepted back into the Air Force, he is now being denied the opportunity to reenlist, which he believes is unjust. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 4 Dec 01 in the grade of airman basic. A...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05775
He had to extend to obtain retainability; however, he was counseled that he would be able to cancel his extension or reenlist on top of time served upon graduation. 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 office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05612
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. However, that extension or reenlistment in Aug 2012 still would not have made the applicant eligible for the SRB because member's have to be a 3-skill level in the SRB career field at the time...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00708
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His reenlistment date needs to be changed to allow him to meet the requirement for the Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) Zone A and to be within 30 days of his retraining technical school Class Graduation Date (CGD). On 13 Dec 13, DFAS notified him that he should have been allowed to reenlist within the 30 day window (even though his AFSC/CJR was not updated) with a 2.0 multiplier. He was further advised that DFAS could only remit the debt and to file BCMR to have...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04666
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04666 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 3 year and 25 month reenlistment be changed to a 5 year reenlistment and his entitlement to a Zone B, Multiple 7.0, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for three years, be changed to 5 years. The applicant was not eligible to cancel his...
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,...