Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05576
Original file (BC 2012 05576.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-05576
		
	COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

As amended, his date of appointment into the Air National Guard (ANG) be changed from 17 Sep 12 to 1 Aug 12.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Air Force Recruiters failed to submit his AF Form 1288, Application for Ready Reserve Assignment, to the Air Force Personnel Center in a timely manner, causing him to experience an unplanned 47 day break in service as he transitioned from active duty into the ANG.  Were it not for this inadvertent break in service, he would have been recommended for promotion earlier.   

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

_________________ ______________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit C. 

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1P recommends granting the applicant’s request.  The applicant separated from the active duty Air Force on 31 Jul 12, and was appointed in the ANG on 17 Sep 12, but he should have been appointed on 1 Aug 12.  His late appointment into the ANG was in error.  Recommend amending his date of appointment to 1 Aug 12 to reflect that he was a direct appointment into the ANG from the active duty Air Force.  
A complete copy of the NGB/A1P evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He agrees with the recommendation of NGB/A1P and requests his appointment date into the ANG be amended from 17 Sep 12 to 1 Aug 12.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient 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, to include his rebuttal response to the advisory opinion, and agree with the opinion of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) that relief should be granted.  We note the Board is without authority to recommend granting the requested relief as the records necessary to effect the appointment of an Air National Guard officer are not Air Force records and are therefore beyond the authority of the Board to correct.  However, we believe it appropriate to recommend the applicant’s date of separation from the Regular Air Force be corrected to reflect he was discharged from active duty the day prior to his appointment in the Air National Guard, thereby eliminating his break in service.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was not discharged from the Regular Air Force on 31 July 2012, but on that date, continued to serve active duty until 16 September 2012, on which date he tendered his resignation, was Honorably discharged from all Regular Air Force appointments, and was released from active duty and transferred to the Air National Guard.  

________________________________________________________________



The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05576 in Executive Session on 19 Sep 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Nov 12, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1P, dated 24 Jan 13, w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Feb 13.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Mar 13.  
	



                                   
                                   Panel Chair






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02236

    Original file (BC-2012-02236.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02236 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to transfer his Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits to his dependents. Therefore, he never received the Post 9/11 GI Bill separation counseling regarding the requirement to submit the Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) request before his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02988

    Original file (BC-2011-02988.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His Separation Program Designator (SPD) of “JBK” (completion of required active service – denied reenlistment – one half separation pay) on his National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 22, be changed to “LBK,” (completion of required active service – denied reenlistment – one half separation pay). The applicant provided additional statements and documentation to substantiate that he was not recommended for reenlistment in accordance with the governing directives; was not given feedback properly;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02883

    Original file (BC-2008-02883.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Any and or all ANG and Army records damaged by the Revocation of Flying Order action be corrected. During this time, he received a negative OPR from his AFR unit. He was never informed his Flying Order would be permanently revoked, in fact, he was told by his former ANG commander that his record would not be damaged in any way should he be unable to return to Oklahoma for continuation of T-37 training with only one day’s notice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03451

    Original file (BC-2011-03451.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends his NGB Form 22 be changed to reflect a medical separation and denial of a change to the RE code. The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant/counsel on 18 Nov 11 for review and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 03005

    Original file (BC 2012 03005.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03005 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be placed on medical continuation (MEDCON) orders from 9 Nov 11 until he is returned to duty or disability separated. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03031

    Original file (BC-2012-03031.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    JA states that based on the facts presented in the NGB opinions, JA finds their responses to be legally sufficient and concurs with the recommendations to deny the applicant's requests for corrective action related to ACP payments, Board# V0611A, AGR separation from ANG Selective Retention Review Board (SRRB) consideration, and TERA. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit N. _______________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PF...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02121

    Original file (BC-2012-02121.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02121 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated as an F-16 pilot in the Oklahoma Air National Guard, effective 9 Jan 12. (3) In the judgment of the flight examiner, a Q2 may be given if there is justification based on Q- performance in one or several areas/subareas), requiring him...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05006

    Original file (BC 2013 05006.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to documentation provided by the applicant, on 20 Jun 13, the applicant requested removal of the contested OPR to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB); however, her request was denied. Based on our review of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the contested report is not a true and accurate assessment of her performance and demonstrated potential during the specified time period or that the comments contained in the report...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02191

    Original file (BC-2011-02191.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 1 Oct 10, he became eligible for ACP when he received his initial AGR tour orders. The applicant was initially ordered to extended active duty from 1 Oct 10 to 30 Sep 13. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04178

    Original file (BC 2014 04178.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PS recommends denial. However, should after exhausting his administrative avenue of relief, the applicant feel he is still a victim of an error or injustice, the applicant may resubmit his application to the Board for consideration. The following documentary evidence was...