Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03163
Original file (BC 2013 03163.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03163

	 		COUNSEL: NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His date of separation (DOS) be changed from 1 July 2018 to 
1 July 2016. 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was mistakenly guided during his first reenlistment.  He was 
directed to reenlist by the military personnel flight (MPF).  
The MPF informed him that he was within 180 days of the 
expiration term of his service (ETS) and must attend a mandatory 
reenlistment briefing.  He contacted the office to confirm the 
briefing was required even though he had already extended for 
23 months.  He was again told that he had to attend the 
briefing.  He trusted the expertise of the office and attended 
the briefing.

When he received the DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment 
Document Armed Forces of the United States, he was not given the 
correct explanation regarding the 23 months he initialed.  He 
was told the 23 months was the military service obligation that 
he would be subject to recall after separation.  He learned of 
his DOS when transferring his Post-9/11 GI Bill to his wife.  He 
was informed that he did not need to extend due to his 2018 DOS.  
It was also at that time, he was told the 23 months he initialed 
obligated him to 23 months of active duty service.

He did not have any intention of reenlisting for more than four 
years from 2 August 2012.  He was not reenlisting for an 
enlistment bonus or for the Post-9/11 GI Bill. 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides DD Form 4/1, 
email correspondence and AF IMT 1411, Extension or Cancellation 
of Extension of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force/Air Force 
Reserve.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently active duty serving in the grade of 
staff sergeant.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this case are 
contained in the letter prepared by Air Force office of primary 
responsibility which is listed at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial.  The applicant enlisted in the 
Regular Air Force on 8 August 2006 for a period of six years 
establishing his ETS and DOS as 7 August 2012.  He extended on 
7 July 2010 for 23 months to qualify for an assignment which 
established his DOS as 7 July 2014, while his ETS remained 
7 August 2012.  

He was notified by e-mail on 8 June 2012 that he was scheduled 
for a mandatory briefing to discuss his options and ask 
questions.  He was eligible to reenlist any time before his 
7 August 2012 ETS, once he entered his extension, his new 
reenlistment window would have been the 90 day period before his 
7 July 2014 DOS.  His only options were to reenlist for 4 years 
and 23 months or not reenlist and enter his 23 month extension 
on 8 August 2012.  He chose to reenlist.

The applicant states he was told he had to reenlist.  This does 
not make sense as it is clear he had a 23 month extension he 
could have entered.  He knew his DOS was 7 July 2014, so it is 
unclear why he would reenlist knowing his DOS was 2 years away.  

The complete DPSOA 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 30 August 2013, for review and comment within 
30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received 
no response.

________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  The 
applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his 
contentions were duly noted.  However, we do not find the 
applicant’s assertions and the documentation presented in 
support of his appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the 
rationale provided by Air Force office of primary 
responsibility.  Therefore, we agree with their opinion and 
recommendation and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion and find 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 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-2013-03163 in Executive Session on 20 March 2014 under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 5 Aug 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 13.




Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05775

    Original file (BC 2013 05775.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 03116

    Original file (BC 2013 03116.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He requested to cancel his 19-month extension within the 30-day period after his Consecutive Overseas Assignment from Korea to Germany was cancelled. However, they are not sure what the applicant is trying to point out as far as the HYT changes, since his eight-year HYT date was 2 July 2015 and the 19-month extension only had him serving to his current DOS of 1 February 2015; well short of his HYT date. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05607

    Original file (BC 2013 05607.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-03879

    Original file (BC-2011-03879.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-03826

    Original file (BC-2012-03826.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 19 Jan 10, the applicant was counseled by Military Personnel Flight (MPF) via the AF IMT 1411, Extension or Cancellation of Extensions of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force/Air Force Reserve on his extension request and his available options. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates his argument that he was miscounseled when told he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04666

    Original file (BC 2013 04666.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04666 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 3 year and 25 month reenlistment be changed to a 5 year reenlistment and his entitlement to a Zone B, Multiple 7.0, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) for three years, be changed to 5 years. The applicant was not eligible to cancel his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01383

    Original file (BC-2012-01383.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01383 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 22-month extension of his enlistment contract entered on 31 May 11, be cancelled and his original date of separation (DOS) be restored. DPSOA states AFI 26-2606, Reenlistments in the USAF, paragraph 6.12.4 allows members to request cancellation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021499

    Original file (20140021499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His record contains a DA Form 4836 (Oath of Extension of Enlistment or Reenlistment), dated 6 May 2012, wherein it shows he extended his enlistment in the MTARNG on that date for a period of 2 years. The evidence of record confirms having had prior service in the USAF while serving in a medical MOS, the applicant enlisted in the MTARNG on 21 June 2010 for a period of 6 years. However, on the same date the MTARNG service representative executed a prior-service SLRP Addendum stating the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05612

    Original file (BC 2013 05612 .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/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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 03119

    Original file (BC 2013 03119.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03119 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Term of Enlistment (TOE) for his 26 September 2008 reenlistment be considered as five years and nine weeks rather than five years and nine months. Per Air Force guidance, years and months is the only authorized terms of enlistment/reenlistment...