RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00097
		INDEX CODE:  128.05
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

	MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 Jul 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be authorized a Zone B, Multiple 2.0, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to an error on an extension she completed on 29 Apr 03, she completed a second extension on 21 Jun 04 at Seymour Johnson AFB.  She was briefed that she was entitled to an SRB for the 16 months of her second extension.  The Retentions office at Kadena AB told her that she was not entitled to the SRB because the extension was not between 36 and 48 months.  She was briefed incorrectly and the information on the two AF Forms 1411 were incorrect.  

In support of her request, applicant provided a copy of her extension contracts.  Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted her initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 17 Aug 94.  She has been progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Mar 05.

She was required to reenlist or extend her enlistment for a total of 16 months to meet the retainability requirements for a PCS assignment to Kadena AB, Japan.  On 29 Apr 03, at Seymour Johnson AFB, SC, she extended her enlistment for a period of 15 months.  On 21 Jun 04, due to a miscalculation of the initial extension, she was required to extend for an additional month in order to fully meet the retainability requirements.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  DPPAE states it should be noted that there was no SRB entitlement made on the initial 15-month extension.  Due to an administrative error, the 1-month extension authorized a Zone B, Multiple 2, SRB.  There was no miscounseling and the extensions initiated by the applicant clearly show she was just extending to meet minimum requirements.  In order to qualify for an SRB, members must reenlist or extend their enlistments (in one increment) for a period of at least three years.  At no time during the current extensions executed by the applicant was there authorization or entitlement to a Zone B, Multiple 2.0 SRB.  The Air Force does not authorize SRB payments for any period less than three years.  

The only administrative error on either extension document relates to the second extension of 1-month and the Zone B, Multiple 2.0 SRB, which erroneously authorizes the SRB.  At no time did the applicant ever intend to extend for a period sufficient to meet the requirements of the SRB, but only wanting to extend a sufficient time to meet the requirements of the assignment, but she is now willing to go back and do an extension to meet the SRB requirements.  

The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reiterates she was briefed that there was a miscalculation in the number of months that she needed to extend as well as her SRB.  She was briefed she was entitled to a Zone B, Multiple 2.0 SRB for the 16-month extension.  She was never briefed she had to extend for three years to receive the SRB.  The extension contract provided clearly shows she was counseled she was entitled to the SRB.  This was not only an administrative error but evidence of miscounseling as well.  Her decision to extend for the length of time she did was based solely on the counseling she received.

Her complete response, with attachments, 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 or injustice warranting corrective action by this Board.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the error on her one-month extension contract indicating her entitlement to an SRB, is administrative in nature and does not, in itself, authorize her SRB entitlements.  We considered her request that she be allowed to retroactively extend her enlistment for a period sufficient enough to receive an SRB; however, we note that the statement she initialed in which she believes authorizes her to receive an SRB clearly states that she understands she must extend her enlistment in one increment for a period of between 36 and 48 months to be entitled to an SRB.  Therefore, absent persuasive evidence that she was miscounseled or denied rights to which she was entitled, we adopt the rationale provided by the Air Force as basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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-2006-00097 in Executive Session on 16 Mar 06, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 26 Jan 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Feb 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Feb 06, w/atchs.