RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01901 COUNSEL:	NONE
HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His six year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) requirement for Undergraduate Remote Pilot Aircraft (RPA) Training be corrected in his record to three years based on course MQ-1B Initial Qualification and Requalification Training (MQ-11QR) completed 17 Feb 12.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His Air Force Form 63, Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) Acknowledgement Statement dated 25 Jul 11, states “According to AFI 36-2107 Table 1.1 Rule 12, you will incur an ADSC of six years for SUNT and JSUNT”. AFI 36-2107, Active Duty Service Commitments (ADSC), (dated 22 Apr 05, with 2009 addendum) Table
1.1 rule 12 states an ADSC of six years will be incurred for undergraduate navigator training.

It does not say anywhere in the applicable Air Force Instruction that undergraduate RPA pilot training (URPT) incurs an ADSC of six years.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Captain (0-3).

On 22 Jul 11, the applicant signed a 6-year ADSC on Air Force Form 63.

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/DPSIPV recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. In 2008, the Air Force Chief of Staff announced the proper development and integration of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS). Specifically, the Chief stressed the need to rapidly bolster the equipment, training, and operational capability of the UAS with highly trained officers. The ADSC requirement for the UAS undergraduate course was published in the 8106 message mandating that anyone entering the program accept or decline the six year ADSC. The ADSC listed in AFI 36-2107 dated 22 Apr 05, Table 1.1, Rule 16, indicates a three year ADSC is incurred for initial qualification. The rule applies to completion of the UP4AA and MQl1QR (initial qualification) courses. It does not speak to completion of the UP3AA course, which is required to earn the RPA rating. The ADSC policy for the UP3AA course as published in the 8106 is and always has been six years.

The applicant completed UAS Instrument Qualification Training (UP3AA)  on  2  Sep  11;  UAS  Fundamental  Course  (UP4AA)  on
5 Oct 11; and Initial Qualification and Requalification Training (MQl1QR), 17 Feb 12.  He was provided and agreed to an AF Form
63 which specifically indicated the six year requirement vice three years for the training according to Air Force policy at the time he entered. The ADSC in effect for UAS (RPA-P) at the time was and is still six years. Therefore, the applicant incurred and agreed to the six year ADSC expiring on 1 Sep 17.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIPV evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air  Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 31 Jul 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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. We took notice of the applicant’s 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
1.	

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-2015-01901 in Executive Session on 27 Oct 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-01901 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 4 May 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIPV, dated 21 May 15. Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Jul 15.