RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04703
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect he received a Selective
Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for his 3 Oct 11 reenlistment.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
If he had been informed that a new SRB listing was to be released
on 14 Oct 11, he would not have reenlisted on 3 Oct 11.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular
Air Force on 2 Dec 03. On 4 Mar 09, he extended his enlistment
for 23 months to obtain retainability for retraining, resulting
in a new date of separation (DOS) of 1 Nov 11.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial noting the applicants contract did
not include an SRB because his career field was not on the SRB
listing. The SRB was not denied, but rather not an issue based
on no authorization for his career field. The Air Staff
announced on 11 Oct 11 the SRB listing was changing, effective on
14 Oct 11; therefore, there was no way the applicant could have
been briefed prior to that date. Furthermore, there are many
service members who are similarly situated due to their averaging
over 65 reenlistments/extensions daily across 172 career fields,
of which 78 are currently authorized an SRB.
The complete AFPC/DPSOS 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 24 Jan 12, 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 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 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 opinion and the
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the
applicant is not 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 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-2011-04703 in Executive Session on 14 Jun 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Vice Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-04703 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Nov 11.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Military Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 4 Jan 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jan 12.
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03879
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Military Personnel Flight (MPF) reenlistment office altered his DD Form 4/1 to reflect 8 Oct 2007 instead of the date he reenlisted (1 Oct 2007). The problem was the applicant's DOS/ETS was 7 Dec 2011 in DFAS system and 7 Jan 2012 in MILPDS (which coincides with the 8 Oct 2007 reenlistment for four years and three months); the 8 Oct 2007 reenlistment date was verified from his contract located in...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00192
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. 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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03965
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03965 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment contract be changed from a 6 year to a 4 year enlistment. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03821
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03821 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment contract be nullified and he be granted an extension, contingent on reenlisting in the future, if necessary. He admits to being the biggest culprit in this error for not thoroughly reviewing the contract before signing it; however,...
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 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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-01199
AFI 36-2626, Airman Retraining Program, Attachment 8, SRB Provisions for Retraining, requires the enlistee to acknowledge understanding that if he retrains from a non-SRB skill to an SRB skill or vice-versa, he would not receive an SRB if he reenlists to obtain the retraining retainability, and if he remains eligible to reenlist, he is entitled to the SRB multiple level in effect when final approval is received. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-04229
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. Furthermore, we note the the Air Force office of responsibility recommends denying the applicants request based on the Air Force reenlistment process of contracting in whole year increments rather than in weeks; however,...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01559
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01559 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) debt be stopped and removed from the time he was selected as a Military Training Leader (MTL). He found out that the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) had sent him a letter; however,...