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.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her record shows a HYT of 25 July 2014; however, she was
recently informed that she is authorized an exception to policy
based on her Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC). Her AFSC pays a
selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) which extends her HYT from
8 to 10 years. Due to this error and incorrect counseling, she
missed the opportunity to reenlist during her period of
eligibility and lost a 4.0 SRB.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement and a service information print-out.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is active duty Air Force serving in the grade of
senior airman.
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 D.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. On 19 December 2011, the Air
Force announced the HYT for senior airmen would be reduced from
10 to 8 years. However, the change was phased in to allow most
airmen two opportunities to test for promotion. The HYT for
senior airman with a total active federal military service dated
(TAFMSD) of 30 September 2005 or earlier remained at the
original date 10 years or was adjusted to 29 September 2013. In
the applicants case, her TAFMSD is 25 July 2006; therefore, her
HYT was adjusted to 25 July 2014.
The Personnel Service Delivery Memorandum outlines reenlistment
eligible first term airmen who are authorized a Zone A SRB will
have their HYT adjusted to 10 years of service, provided the
reenlistment/extension occurs before they complete 6 years
TAFMS. The applicant executed a 2-month extension on 2 October
2012 to qualify for an assignment. She contends she received
incorrect counseling which resulted in her missing the
opportunity to reenlist when originally eligible. She also
contends her HYT should be extended because her AFSC pays an
SRB.
HYT is only adjusted on qualifying airman who execute the
appropriate reenlistment/extension before completing 6 years
TAFMS. There is no evidence she attempted to reenlist or extend
to qualify for the Zone A SRB during her period of eligibility.
Therefore, her HYT is correct. Additionally there is no
evidence submitted to support that she was miscounseled.
The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The applicant enlisted in the Air
Force for 6 years on 26 July 2006 establishing her date of
separation (DOS) as 24 July 2012. She extended to obtain
required retainability for 11 months establishing a DOS of
25 July 2013. She has extended three more times since then and
her current DOS is 24 July 2014.
She contends her HYT should be extended to 10 years versus
8 years due to her SRB payable. However, AFI 36-2606,
Reenlistments in the United States Air Force, state first term
airmen in SRB skills authorized to receive a Zone A SRB may
reenlist for periods exceeding their HYT, provided the
reenlistment occurs before they complete 6 years on active duty
and do not establish a DOS exceeding 10 years of service. Those
first term airman in SRB skills authorized a Zone A SRB have an
8 year HYT upon entering the Air Force.
The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 10 January 2014 for review and comment within 30
days (Exhibit E). 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The
applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and her
contentions were duly noted. However, we do not find the
applicants assertions and the documentation presented in
support of her appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the
rationale provided by Air Force offices of primary
responsibility. Therefore, we agree with their opinion and
recommendation and adopt their rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. 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 actionable 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-2013-02924 in Executive Session on 11 March 2014 under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-02924 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Feb 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 8 Jul 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 16 Dec 13.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02969
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02969 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The applicant requested early separation from the Air Force with an effective date of 17 December 2012. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 December 2013.
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 03988
In a letter to the applicant dated 10 December 2013, AFPC/DPSID advised him that his first avenue of relief for his request to replace the 14 January 2012 EPR with the 4 July 2011 and 16 January 2012 electronic EPRs would be through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends the applicant's record be corrected to reflect promotion to the rank of TSgt with a Date of Rank (DOR) and Promotion Effective Date (PED) of 1 May 2013. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00157
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00157 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reentry (RE) code of 2X, which denotes "First Term, Second Term, or Career Airman nonselected for reenlistment be changed to allow him to enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG). According to AF Form 418, dated 8 May 2013, the applicant was notified by his commander that he was not recommending him...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02964
Recoupment of the unearned portion of the applicant’s SRB should not be recouped, as she was removed due to medical reason. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, was forwarded to applicant on 15 Feb 08 for review and response within 30 days. Accordingly, we recommend her records be...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00844
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit B. The applicant did not want to reenlist at that time because a 2 year reenlistment would not entitle him to a zone A SRB; to be eligible for the SRB the member has to reenlist or extend for a minimum of 36 months. The second retainability suspense delay would have allowed the applicant to reenlist for four...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05378
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05378 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces Of the United States, dated 14 Oct 09, be changed to reflect a term of service of 6 years or 4 years with 24 months of obligated service instead of the 4 years of service it currently reflects. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application...
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 | 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...