RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03514
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The 11-month Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) he incurred
for attending the Joint Terminal Attack Controller Course
(JTACAIC) be cancelled.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The JTACAIC course he attended at the Air Force Weapons School
required a 36-month ADSC. He signed the service commitment
under rule 19, AFI 36-2107, Active Duty Service Commitments.
This course has yet to be accredited and the syllabus has not
been approved. An ADSC should not be required until this course
is approved or accredited.
In support of the appeal, the applicant provides documentation
from his master personnel record.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently active duty serving in the grade of
technical sergeant. On 18 December 2012, he signed 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), requesting his enlistment of 18 March
2010 be extended by 11 months to qualify for training.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIP recommends denial. On or about 17 December 2012, the
applicant received notification to attend JTACAIC training from
7 January 2013 through 15 June 2013. At the same time, he was
informed of the requirement to obtain retainability. He
extended his enlistment for 11 additional months to qualify for
training.
The applicant contends he should not obtain retainability for an
unaccredited course. However, the guidance published in AFI 36-
2107, does not state that courses must have accreditation before
ensuring the AF obtains the appropriate return on its
investment. The instruction does on the other hand state in
table 1.1, rule 19, Airmen attending educational program lasting
20 weeks (this includes his program) are required to have or
obtain the required retainability prior to attending to
training. The applicant attended the course and is required to
serve the ADSC. Notwithstanding he had the option to decline
training, he opted to attend; his extension is valid.
The complete DPSIP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial. The applicant does not contest
his extension; he contends the reason for the extension is
invalid. Reenlistments do not validate the reason for
retainability; they assist in getting the retainability, if
eligible. The office of primary responsibility, AFPC/DPSIP, has
validated the 11 month retainability requirement and recommended
the requirement remain firm.
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, 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. We took notice
of the applicants submission in judging the merits of the case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the
AFPC/DPSIP and adopt its rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicants 11-month extension is valid and
find that he has not been 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 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-2013-03514 in Executive Session on 10 April 2014 under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Jul 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIP, dated 9 Sep 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 1 Nov 13.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01807
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01807 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) be changed from 72 months to 36 months. He received a training Report on Individual Personnel (RIP) and AF Form 63, Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) Acknowledgement Statement, which he agreed to and...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05084
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05084 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His active duty service commitment (ADSC) incurred for participation in the Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Beta Test Program (UBTP) be changed from six years to three years. In support of his appeal, the applicant submits a 66-paragragh personal...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00018
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00018 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His active duty service commitment (ADSC) incurred for advanced flying training (AFT) be changed from 1 May 15 to 14 Jan 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 03929
He was notified of his selection for the BETA III RPA training, and was informed and counseled based on his training allocation notification Reports of Individual Personnel (RIPs), that this training incurred a 36-month ADSC. He accepted the training by signing the training allocation RIPs that reflected a 36-month ADSC and subsequently signed an AF Form 63, Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) Acknowledgement Statement with a three-year ADSC. 2) When he signed his RIPs he was counseled...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01163
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01163 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 6-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) he incurred for completing Unmanned Aircraft Systems Undergraduate Remote Pilot Aircraft Training course be changed to 3 years. At the time of his training, no documentation was provided acknowledging a 6-year ADSC. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02866
He accepted the training by signing training Reports of Individual Personnel (RIPs) that reflected a 36-month ADSC and subsequently signed an AF Form 63 with a three-year ADSC. He has provided documentation from two RPA Beta Test Program graduates that reflect a three-year ADSC for the UP3AA Course. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02866
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was given an assignment to serve as a T-6 Instructor Pilot at Sheppard Air Force Base (AFB), Texas, in April 2010. Upon receiving this assignment he was given an Air Force Personnel Center brief through the Osan Air Base Force Support Squadron (FSS) and Military Personnel Flight (MPF) outbound assignments division. He reported to Sheppard AFB in June 2010 and completed T-6 Pilot Instructor...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04772
On 19 Sep 11, the applicant acknowledged the new ADSC of 9 Feb 15 and agreed to the new training dates by signing the AF Form 63, ADSC Acknowledgement Statement. Instead, she accepted the training and agreed to the ADSC that began upon completion of the ADSC incurring event. On 19 Sep 11, the applicant received and acknowledged the ADSC and agreed to the new training dates.
This generated a training allocation notification R I T , which clearly indicated a three-year RDSC would be incurred, and applicant was required to initial the following statements on the RIP, I I I accept training and will obtain the required retainability" and ''1 understand upon completion of this training I will incur the following active duty service commitments (ADSC) ' I . Although documentation of counseling does not exist and applicant denies that it occurred, they believe it's a...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02904
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02904 INDEX CODE: 128.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment contract be changed to reflect the 1A131, Flight Engineer Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) so he can qualify for a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). To meet retainability requirements and complete the...