RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00221
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His reenlistment date be changed from 20 December 2010 to
5 January 2011.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His date of separation was 23 January 2011. An article on the
Air Force Personnel Services website has a document listed, dated
10 December 2010, indicating the Fiscal Year 2011 Selective
Reenlistment Bonuses (SRBs). This article and the January 2011
SRBs were not published online until 4 January 2011. He was not
aware or informed that a new SRB List would be released, so on
20 December 2010, he reenlisted when the SRB for his Air Force
Specialty Code (AFSC) of 1A2X1 (Aircraft Loadmaster) was still
zero. The new SRB list indicates that effective 3 January 2011
the SRB for AFSC 1A2X1 is now 1.0. He was eligible to reenlist
after 3 January 2011 and would like to change his reenlistment
date to reflect such.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of the
SRB Announcement Message, dated 20 December 2010; SRB Program
Guidance and Procedures Message, dated 20 December 2010; and a
SRB AFSCs Effective 3 January 2011 Listing.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in
the grade of senior airman (E-4). On 20 December 2010, he
reenlisted for a period of four years and one month.
The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants
master personnel records, are contained in the evaluation by the
Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states that they conducted
an examination of the Air Force Personnel Services website and
found no article announcing the Fiscal Year 2011 SRB Listing
dated 10 December 2010. On 20 December 2010, the Air Staff
announced the Fiscal Year 2011 SRB Listing with an effective date
of 3 January 2011 for all increases/added skills. AFPC/DPS
announced the implementation message which provided program
guidance and procedures to the Military Personnel Sections.
Nevertheless, the applicant reenlisted on 20 December 2010;
therefore, he had ten days to cancel his reenlistment and
reenlist at a later date which would have qualified him for the
SRB. His date of separation was 22 January 2011; therefore, he
could have easily cancelled his projected reenlistment based on
the Air Force Personnel Service website information he stated he
saw; however, as evidence clearly shows he failed to take all
reasonable measures to qualify himself for the SRB based on his
knowledge of the Fiscal Year 2011 SRB Listing.
The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states he read the message date incorrectly as
10 December 2010 rather than 20 December 2010; however, he did
not see the article until 5 January 2011, approximately two weeks
after he had reenlisted. As soon as he discovered the article,
he began to take the appropriate actions to file for a correction
of military records. Even if he had seen the article on
20 December 2010, when it posted, he had already reenlisted on
that same day and it would have been impossible for him to cancel
his reenlistment and reenlist on a later date as suggested. He
does not believe he has failed to take all reasonable measures to
qualify for the SRB as at the time of his reenlistment, he had
absolutely zero knowledge of the Fiscal Year 2011 SRB Listing.
The applicants 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or an 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 the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Although regrettable the applicant did not review the article
announcing the SRB listing until outside the 10-day window he had
to cancel his reenlistment, the article was available and the
applicant has not established that he is the victim of error or
injustice casued by the Air Force. 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-2011-00221 in Executive Session on 29 November 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2011-00221:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jan 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 29 Mar 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Apr 11.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Apr 11.
Panel 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...
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 | CY2008 | BC-2008-00485
However, after meeting the requirements of his contract and submitting his request for the bonus through his Military Personnel Flight (MPF), the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) denied his request and would not honor his contract citing that in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2606, he was not entitled to receive a bonus even though his contract stated he was. He should receive the SRB indicated in his reenlistment contract even though the Air Force is denying payment due to their...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00465
However, they find no evidence that supports the applicant receiving an SRB he is not entitled to, when many other Air Force members will not receive the SRB, even though the same circumstances apply to them with the exception of the initial mistake. In view of the above, the Board recommends his records be corrected as indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03272
He executed his reenlistment 6 February 2006, almost 120 days before the announced effective date of the SRB. Additionally, he is not eligible to execute a six- year reenlistment as it exceeds the authorized term of enlistment authorized by the Air Force. In this regard, the applicant is requesting that he be authorized a Zone A, Multiple 2, SRB as reflected on his 6 February 2006 reenlistment contract.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00489
The applicant reenlisted before the announcement date. 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. _______________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02924
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02924 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her high year tenure (HYT) date be changed from 25 July 2014 to 25 July 2016. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this case are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and listed at Exhibits C and...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00470
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his MTI application, his AF IMT 901, Reenlistment Eligibility Annex to DD Form 4, DD Form 4/1, Enlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States; extract copies from continuity book and special duty assignment application. DPSOA states while there was an initial mistake made by not recouping the SRB immediately upon approval of the Special Duty, they find no evidence that supports the applicant receiving an SRB he is not...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02749
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. On 29 Aug 06, the AFCC advised the applicant he met the qualifications for retraining into all of his requested AFSCs; that he would receive a separate email identifying...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00609
DPPAE states the applicant is not eligible to receive the SRB that was in effect when he was approved for retraining because he did not reenlist within 30 days of the notice of termination of the SRB for that career field. DPPAE’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he never received official notification of the requirement to reenlist within 30 days of...