RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03473
INDEX CODE:  112.00
    	COUNSEL:  NONE

    	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given a constructive reenlistment dated 17 January 2002 for a period of six years with a Zone B Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB).  

__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In 1997 he had an assignment that required retainability and he was not given the opportunity to extend for a period between 36 and 48 months.  Had he been given this opportunity, he would have extended for 36 months.  

In support of his application, he provides his 26 October 1995 and 14 April 2000 enlistment contracts and his extension of his 1995 enlistment contract.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

__________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) indicates the applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date as 21 July 1992.  He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff sergeant, with an effective date of rank of 1 March 1999.

On 19 November 1997, the applicant, who had an established date of separation of 25 October 1999, requested an extension of his initial enlistment for a period of six months, thereby establishing a new DOS 25 April 2000.

On 14 April 2000, the applicant, who had an established date of separation (DOS) of 25 April 2000, reenlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of 4 years, thereby establishing a new DOS of 13 April 2004.  

__________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied.  DPPAE states that on 14 April 2000, the applicant executed a valid reenlistment in order to remain on active duty.  At the time he reenlisted, his AFSC did not have a Zone B SRB.  The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded by stating that on his AF Form 1411, Extension of Enlistment in the Regular Air Force, it reflects that he was not afforded the opportunity to extend his enlistment for a period of 36-48 months and believes he was not properly counseled on his enlistment options.  Applicant’s response with a supporting letter signed by the MPF commander is at Exhibit E.  

__________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence presented, it appears that in accordance with governing directives, Military Personnel Flight (MPF) representatives took appropriate action in executing the applicant’s extension by allowing him only the minimum number of months required to qualify for his PCS assignment.  Additionally, this same directive stipulates that first-term airmen cannot extend for more than a total of 23 months thus rendering him ineligible to extend for a period between 36-48 months.  We have noted the supportive statement provided by the MPF commander and do not find it sufficient to show that the applicant was entitled by either the governing Air Force instruction or policy to extend for a period greater than 23 months.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error.  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 probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 30 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

Panel Chair
Member
		Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 02 w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 25 Nov 02.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 02.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 6 Jan 03 w/atch.