RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-02912

						COUNSEL:  NONE

HEARING DESIRED:  YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her 1 month and 29 month extensions for Transfer of Education Benefits (TEB) be cancelled so she will have less obligated service with her reenlistment, to allow entitlement to a zone E multiple 3.0 Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

AFPC’s denial of her request to cancel her extensions for TEB is in error.  Per AFI 36-2606, paragraph 6.12.3, she wanted to have her extension canceled because it was not executed.  She was told by her Military Personnel Sections (MPS) that she could not reenlist, but that she qualified for a bonus of $60K.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The Retrieval Applications Web (RAW) reflects the applicant entered active duty on 13 November 1997.  The applicant is currently serving in the grade of master sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 2015.  The applicant’s Date of Separation (DOS) is 24 November 2019.

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/DP2SSM recommends denial, indicating she was correctly briefed that she was not authorized to reenlist with an entitlement to a SRB.

The applicant did not object to her new DOS of 24 November 2019 until a new SRB list authorizing a zone E multiple 3.0 for her Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was released on 23 February 2017.  The applicant’s zone E SRB window was from 13 November 2015 through 12 November 2017.  However, to receive an SRB an airman must either extend or reenlist for a period of 36 months or more.  Since the applicant’s DOS was 24 November 2019 and her High Year Tenure was 13 November 2021, she was only eligible to reenlist for 2 years; 3 years would have taken the applicant past her HYT, which is not authorized.  On 12 May 2017, the applicant first tried to cancel her TEB extensions using paragraph 6.12.4, by revoking the TEB from her 1-year-old child.  Paragraph 6.12.4 refers to extensions executed under rules 12 through 16 and states if the reason for the extension is cancelled and the extension has not been entered an airman can request cancellation of that extension within 30 days of the reason for the extension being cancelled.  TEB extensions are per rule 29 and do not fall under paragraph 6.12.4.

Additionally, TEB retainability cannot be cancelled as the entitlement is still there once approved; meaning, even though the applicant revoked TEB from her child for now, she can reinstate TEB back to that child without obtaining any more retainability.  The applicant then requested the TEB extensions be cancelled under paragraph 6.12.3.  Paragraph 6.12.3 states, “Airmen may request extension cancellation to immediately reenlist due to unique and unusual circumstances, or when other reasons for cancellation were not used or are inappropriate and when fulfilling the extension would result in an injustice.”  Additionally, paragraph 6.12.3 states “Note: Non-receipt of an SRB is not an injustice,” and the applicant is only asking for the TEB extensions to be cancelled (15 months later) to be eligible to receive a SRB.  In addition to the applicant’s request not being authorized per the note in paragraph 6.12.3, her circumstances are not unique as many airman are in her same circumstance, in that, cancelling their obligated service for valid extensions not yet entered would have allowed them to receive an SRB.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2SSM 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 29 December 2017 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 OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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-2017-02912 in Executive Session on 15 February 2018 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2017-02912 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 23 May 2017, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpts from Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 
  5 December 2017.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 December 2017, w/atch.

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.