RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03488
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-
Type Training, dated 29 Mar 12, Block IV, Evaluation to be
Considered in the Future for Determining Acceptability for Other
Officer Training, be changed to reflect 1, (Highly
Recommended) or 2 (Recommended as an Average Candidate) rather
than 5 (Definitely Not Recommended).
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
While he was completing his training in an Air Force Reserve
Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) program, at Tulane University,
he never committed any atrocities so egregious to warrant being
barred from commissioning. His member of Congress also believes
his disenrollment was unjustly harsh.
He has received an honorable discharge and completed the AFROTC
curriculum, and if the DD Form 785 is corrected he can receive a
direct commission.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 3 May 12, the applicant was disenrolled from the AFROTC
program under the provisions of AFI 36-2011, Air Force Reserve
Officer Training Corps Program, para 6.1.5, and AFROTCI 36-2011, Cadet Operations, para 11.4.2.3, for failure to maintain
military retention standards. Specifically, he failed to
maintain military retention standards to include failure to
exercise the maturity and judgment expected of an officer
candidate when he repeatedly demonstrated poor decision making
ability and inadequate progress in adapting to the military
environment, much less the demands of military officership.
On 3 May 12, the applicant was honorably discharged from his
assignment with Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) (AFROTC) and
furnished an honorable discharge certificate.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Holm Center/JA recommends denial, stating, in part, that after a
careful review of the disenrollment records and the report of
investigation, AFROTC properly determined the applicant
repeatedly failed to meet the standards expected of an officer
candidate. His records were carefully reviewed through all
levels of AFROTC and the decision to give him a "5" rating
reflects a fair, consistent, and impartial evaluation for all
AFROTC cadets on a national level. While this response to his
application may not be a favorable one, AFROTC's decision to
disenroll him and to give him a "5" rating are both legally
sufficient and appropriately applied.
The applicants records show that he was unable to adapt to
military standards. During the course of the disenrollment
investigation his infractions were documented through eight
AFROTC Forms 16, Officer Candidate Counseling Record, as well as
a Letter of Reprimand (LOR). As a result of his failure to
adapt, AFROTC determined that he was not fit for active military
duty in the Air Force. Also, he performed significantly below
average while in the AFROTC program. At the time of his
disenrollment, he had a 2.95 cumulative grade point average
(28th percentile) and a Field Training ranking of 18/22 (18th
percentile), which placed him well below average and therefore
not qualified for a "1" or "2" rating on the DD Form 785.
Finally, after four years in the AFROTC program, he still had
problems with following the rules. This directly impacted his
being given the "5" rating on the DD Form 785. It should be
noted that this rating is a recommendation, which is not binding
on the other branches of service should he chooses to pursue a
commission elsewhere.
The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 24 Sep 12 for review and response. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________
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 complete submission, including his inquiry
from his member of Congress, in judging the merits of the case.
However, the Holm Center/JA has adequately addressed the issues
presented by the applicant and we are in agreement with its
opinion and recommendation. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to
recommend granting the relief sought.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
________________________________________________________________
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-2012-03488 in Executive Session on 21 May 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Aug 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, Holm Center/JA, dated 17 Sep 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Sep 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02423
AFROTC is authorized up to 60 days to review all disenrollment investigations. e. The decision to call the applicant to EAD is not punitive in nature; rather, it is an activation of the voluntary commitment he made to the Air Force via the contract (AF Form 1056) he signed on 13 August 2008, in exchange for education and training benefits and the opportunity to earn a commission as an Air Force officer. In this respect, the majority notes the Holm Center/JA evaluation indicates the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00226
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFROTC/CC recommends denial. AFROTC/CC advises that Air Force and AFROTC policy states applicants are not eligible for service with the Air Force if they have ever...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04570
On 28 Apr 1981, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserves. JA states per the Air Force Records Information Management System, Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-Type Training records are destroyed after three years. The final disenrollment decision, made by HQ AFROTC, would have considered any response provided the applicant.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04504
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2011-04504 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His numerical rating in Section IV, of his DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate Type Training, be changed from a 3-Should Not Be Considered Without Weighing the Needs of the Service Against the Reasons for Disenrollment, to...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03210 INDEX CODE: 128.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Board make an “affirmation of monies” owed and to correct a “false categorization.” ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02140
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02140 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) debt that he incurred as a result of his disenrollment be cancelled. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the Air Force office of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03587
However, they do recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to show that the time of his disenrollment he was on conduct probation not academic probation. HQ USAFA/JA opines the applicant was not prejudiced by the error and that the applicant was disenrolled for his Wing Honor Code violations The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s counsel states in his response that...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02554
On 18 Sep 03, the applicant was disenrolled from the AFROTC program for failure to maintain military retention standards (making a statement regarding his homosexuality) and breach of his AFROTC contract (withdrawing from school). He indicates in the letter he was disenrolled from AFROTC “when my commander found out that I’m homosexual.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFOATS/JA recommends denial of the applicant’s request. He does...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02200
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02200 INDEX CODE: 108.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: Mr. Douglas H. Kohrt XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records, specifically her DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-Type Training, Section IV, be changed from “Definitely Not Recommended” to “Highly...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00607
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00607 COUNSEL: NONE INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate Type Training, dated 27 September 2006, be corrected to reflect a rating of 1 Highly Recommended or 2 Recommended as an Average Candidate instead of 3 - Should Not Be Considered Without Weighing The Needs of the Service Against...