RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00998
COUNSEL: NONE INDICATED
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect his enlisted duty history.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His enlisted active duty and deployment history was accidentally omitted from his records when he was commissioned as an officer. His records must reflect his total service for consideration by the Air Forces Force Shaping Boards (FSB).
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 September 1991.
On 09 May 1999, the applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), with a narrative reason for separation of Completion of Required Active Service, and was credited with seven years, eight months, and five days of total active service.
On 25 June 2001, the applicant enlisted into the Air Force Reserve (AFRES) and discharged on 24 February 2010.
On 25 February 2010, under Reserve Order D-0241, dated 1 April 2010, the applicant was commissioned into the Air Force Reserve and then placed on extended active duty on 23 May 2010.
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of captain (O-3).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial. Air Force officers with prior enlisted service will not maintain their enlisted duty history in the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS). In addition, temporary duty history is not updated in an Airmans duty history.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPTOS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to the applicant on 19 September 2014 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicants 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-00998 in Executive Session on 6 January 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 February 2014, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPTOS, dated 22 April 2014.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 September 2014.
3
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01016
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/DPTOS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Enlisted duty history has no bearing on officer promotion boards or members record. Therefore, in view of the fact that enlisted duty titles should not appear in the applicants records, we...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00998
In addition, the Air Force Instruction (AFI) stated that an officer transferring into the Air Force should not be given a DOR that subjects them to a promotion board within one year of the transfer or without a completed officer performance report (OPR) on file. The remaining 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00998
In addition, the Air Force Instruction (AFI) stated that an officer transferring into the Air Force should not be given a DOR that subjects them to a promotion board within one year of the transfer or without a completed officer performance report (OPR) on file. The remaining 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03833
_________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAO recommends changing the applicants duty title as Group Commander for the IAAFA, effective 28 Jul 10. DPAO states that at the time the applicant met the SERB his records did not correctly reflect his current duty as Group Commander; however, the applicant provided documentation showing his assumption of command on 28 Jul 10. The DPAO complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPTOS states...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00485
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00485 COUNSEL: YES HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His summary court-martial (SCM) and lost time be removed from his record. Exhibit B.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00175
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00175 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. We note that the relief sought by the applicant to correct his duty title to reflect Weapons Load Crew Member from 5 October 2004 to 9 May 2008 has been granted administratively. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 September 2014.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01605
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice in reference to lost time. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request for award of the AFCM, indicating...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00009
The applicants military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 24 Jan 14, for a period of three years. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, E, and F. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial with respect to the applicants request for his lost time to be reinstated. A complete copy of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00583
On 9 Dec 92, the applicant was notified by AFMPC/DPMDOA that only the lost time in conjunction with his early release from active duty was waived, not his lost time spent in confinement. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPTOS recommends denial. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Sep 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05227
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/JA recommends the applicants request be approved and that his re-entry (RE) code be updated once the lost time is removed from his records. At the same time, the applicant requested that his lost time be re-calculated; however, as the commander non-concurred with his request, the lost...