RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-05065

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His uncharacterized character of service/entry level separation (ELS) for the period of 21 Oct 97 to 19 Feb 98 be upgraded to honorable.  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The period of service covered the time he was attending officer training school (OTS) at Maxwell AFB, AL.  Upon graduation, he was discharged and commissioned as an officer on 20 Feb 98.  His subsequent periods of active duty service are characterized as honorable.   

He is a federal law enforcement civilian and is attempting to buy back accrued military active duty years into the federal civilian retirement system.  However, only DD Forms 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which reflect an honorable discharge are accepted.      

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is in the Air Force Reserve serving in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5).  

The applicant entered an initial period of active duty service on 21 Oct 97 and was discharged on 19 Feb 98 in the grade of Staff Sergeant (SSgt, E-5) with an ELS and narrative reason for separation of “Commissioned or warrant in same branch of service.”  He served 3 months and 29 days of active duty service.  

Applicant provides a copy of his Extended Active Duty (EAD) order, Special Order AB-002 dated 20 Feb 98, which indicates he was honorably discharged in the grade of SSgt effective 19 Feb 98.   

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/DP2STM-SEP recommends denial.  The applicant has not filed a timely petition.  It has been 19 years since his discharge.  Furthermore, the ELS was processed in accordance with Department of Defense (DOD) and Air Force instructions.  There is no evidence of an error or injustice in the discharge processing.  

The applicant’s completion of his active duty service while in OTS required discharge with an ELS.  In accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, the service for airmen separated for completion of officer training will be characterized as honorable unless an ELS is required according to paragraph 1.19,  which states airmen are in entry level status during the first 180 days of continuous active military service.  The applicant began his training on 21 Oct 97 and the length of OTS was less than 180 days, therefore, ELS was warranted.  

The DOD determined if a member served less than 180 days continuous active service, it would be unfair to the member and the service to characterize their limited service. Therefore, the uncharacterized character of service on his DD Form 214 is correct.   To grant relief would be contrary to the criteria established by DOD 1332.14, Enlisted Administrative Separation.   

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM-SEP 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 19 Dec 17 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.

2.  The application was not timely filed.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago and the application is therefore untimely.  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 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS 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-2016-05065 in Executive Session on 24 Feb 18 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Dec 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpts of Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 11 Dec 17.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 19 Dec 17.  

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.