Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00628
Original file (BC-2010-00628.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00628 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her date of separation (DOS) be corrected to reflect 26 Mar 11, 
instead of 13 Jun 12. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Her initial commitment was for 24 months, as reflected on her 
original Extended Active Duty (EAD) order. Her virtual Military 
Personnel Flight (vMPF) records reflected this for over a year 
and a half. She later took tuition assistance which resulted in 
her original DOS being adjusted to 26 Mar 11. Sometime later, 
AFPC advised that her original DOS was incorrect due to a glitch 
and took action to change it in the Military Personnel Data 
System (MilPDS) to reflect a four-year initial commitment. She 
feels it is unjust to change her DOS based on a “glitch in the 
system” when her plans were based on an established DOS of 
26 Mar 11. AFPC’s action to extend her DOS when her original 
orders indicated a 24-month tour is unjust and unfair. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her 
initial EAD order and excerpts from her vMPF records. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that she 
executed an Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) 
Contract on 5 Feb 07. Included in the terms of the contract is 
a four-year active duty service commitment (ADSC) from the date 
of her entry on active duty. 

 

 

 

She commenced her initial period of active duty on 13 Jun 08. 
Her EAD orders reflect a tour length of 24 months in Item 7, For 
Personnel Going to Overseas Location. She has served 


continuously and was progressively promoted to the grade of 
first lieutenant (O-2), effective and with a date of rank of 
23 May 10. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPASL recommends denial, indicating the applicant incurred 
a four-year ADSC upon receipt of her appointment as a 
commissioned officer when she signed her initial commissioning 
contract. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPASL evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSIPR recommends denial, indicating the applicant accepted 
a four-year ADSC upon entering active duty. The reference to 
the 24 month tour length (item 7b on her EAD orders) was not a 
reference to her ADSC, but meant to indicate the tour length for 
personnel with an overseas assignment, and is therefore not 
applicable to the applicant. The applicant separated from 
active duty on 13 Aug 10 under the FY10 Force Management Program 
and transitioned to the Air Force Reserve where her service 
commitment date remains 13 Jun 12. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIPR evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 10 Sep 10 for review and response 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 an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 


recommendations 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. Therefore, 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 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-2010-00628 in Executive Session on 14 Oct 10, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Feb 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPASL, dated 30 Mar 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSIPR, dated 2 Sep 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Sep 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03973

    Original file (BC 2013 03973.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03973 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) for transfer of his Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational benefits to his dependents be corrected to 9 Apr 2018 [sic]. Post-9/11 GI Bill: Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty or Selected Reserve, officer or...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01699

    Original file (BC-2011-01699.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was awarded credit for JPME II (for attending Joint and Combined Warfighting School (JCWS)) in Nov 05; however, JPME II is not reflected on OSBs. The applicant completed JPME II on 18 Nov 05, but did not receive full joint tour credit until 1 Sep 09. AFPC/DPSID notified the applicant that his attendance at JPME II is documented in his training report (TR) rendered for the period 12 Sep 05 to 18 Nov 05, and they verified that the report was filed in his officer selection...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05219

    Original file (BC 2013 05219.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Transferability of unused benefits to dependents: • Any member of the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve) on or after 1 August 2009 who meets Post-9/11 GI Bill eligibility requirements and at the time of the approval of the member’s request to transfer entitlement to educational assistance the member meets one of the following: o Has at least 6 years of service in the Armed Forces (active duty and/or Selected Reserve, NOAA Corps, or PHS) on the date of application and agrees...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00265

    Original file (BC-2013-00265.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends approval of the applicant’s initial application on 29 January 2010, with an ADSC adjustment to 28 January 2014. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00265 in Executive Session on 4 November 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100303

    Original file (0100303.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Knowing that he had a six-year ADSC, he took TA to run concurrently with his Air Force Academy commitment; that unknown to him, the applicable Air Force Instruction (AFI 36-2107) was re-written in June of 2000 stating that the ADSC for service academy graduates is five years; that sometime during his tour at Elmendorf, his ADSC changed from six years to five years, but he was never informed by his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05876

    Original file (BC 2013 05876.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s first TEB application clearly stated the service member must use the vMPF to complete the TEB SOU. It also stated if the service member did not meet the retainability requirements and failed to sign the TEB SOU within 14 days, the application would be rejected. He was provided a TEB extension until 16 Nov 11; however, he failed to sign the TEB SOU.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00380

    Original file (BC-2007-00380.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2007-00380 INDEX NUMBER: 100.07 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 AUG 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) for Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) be changed to an eight-year commitment. It further stated, if the ADSC changed, he would serve...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02736

    Original file (BC 2014 02736.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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/DPSIT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence the applicant signed the SOU in March 11. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00189

    Original file (BC 2014 00189.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Under the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) website, it notifies the applicants that their transfer request is not final until the SOU is digitally signed in the Virtual Military Personnel Flight (vMPF). On 12 Oct 10, an email was sent to the applicant informing her that her application for TEB had expired because she did not sign the SOU. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01734

    Original file (BC-2012-01734.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He knew there was a four year ADSC with the transfer but was completely unaware there was a form to sign at the time of submission for approval. He was sent an email on 13 Jun 2011 requesting he sign and return the SOU. He has served 17 years of service in the United States Air Force and as an officer takes integrity very seriously.