RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03119 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Term of Enlistment (TOE) for his 26 September 2008 reenlistment be considered as five years and nine weeks rather than five years and nine months. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His current enlistment contract shows he enlisted for five years and nine weeks. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his reenlistment contract and a military personnel system document. 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 staff sergeant (E-5) as a Special Agent with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations. He reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 September 2008 for a period of five years and nine months which established his DOS and Expiration of Term of Service (ETS) as 25 June 2014. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPSOA recommends denial. DPSOA states that when the applicant reenlisted on 26 September 2008, he had nine months of obligated service based on his previous DOS from his last enlistment. He reenlisted for five years and nine months; however, the term “weeks” was not lined out on the contract and replaced with the term “months” as stated in the processing procedures. Per Air Force guidance, years and months is the only authorized terms of enlistment/reenlistment as the Air Force does not allow reenlistments down to the week. The applicant’s DOS of 26 June 2008 has been in the personnel data system and on his monthly Leave and Earnings Statement (LES) for almost five years, but any notifications and Records of Individual Personnel (RIPs) would have reflected a 25 June 2014 DOS. On 29 March 2012, the applicant was issued orders for an assignment to Offutt Air Force Base (AFB), Nebraska, with a 30 April 2012 Report Not Later Than Date (RNLTD). His orders indicated he incurred a 24 month Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC); meaning he needed retainability through April 2014. His DOS of 25 June 2014 is also on his orders and is the reason he did not need any retainability for his current assignment. He would have also been made aware of his 25 June 2014 DOS when he processed for his assignment to Offutt AFB in April 2012. DPSOA indicates that if the Board’s decision is to support the applicant’s request, they recommend the Board direct the applicant’s nine weeks be changed to eight weeks or twelve weeks to support conversion to two months (DOS would be 25 November 2013) or three months (DOS would be 25 December 2013) to allow update in the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) and the Defense Finance and Accounting System (DFAS); otherwise there will always be a mismatch in MilPDS and DFAS for his records. Additionally, recommend the Board direct he be extended to April 2014 based on his 24-month ADSC he accepted for his current assignment. The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He respectfully rebuts the DPSOA advisory opinion due to the fact that a reenlistment contract is exactly that, a binding contract. The mere concept that “he should have been aware” does not negate the fact that the reenlistment contract is a binding contract. It is a complete injustice of the United States Code (USC) to employ the concept of “should have been aware” to justify reasoning for denial of an official request. The excuse provided by DPSOA has no bearing to the USC and is simply not legal justification to deviate from an official contract’s verbiage. He requests his reenlistment contract be honored and his DOS be corrected. The applicant’s complete rebuttal 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 not timely filed; 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 an 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We took note that although the reenlistment form needs to be revised to reflect months rather than weeks, the applicant was aware that he had nine months remaining on his enlistment when he reenlisted for five years. This fact is also evident when he accepted his PCS to Offutt AFB and had to have retainability for the assignment. Had he only had five years and nine weeks, he would have had to extend. Therefore, 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 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-2013-03119 in Executive Session on 20 March 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03119: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Jun 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPOSA, dated 28 Aug 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Sep 13. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Sep 13. 2 3 4