RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03479

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED: No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records  be  corrected  to  reflect  a  regular  retirement  instead  of
Voluntary Separation Incentive (VSI).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust  and
the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter  prepared  by  the
appropriate office of the Air Force.   Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to
recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief,  Retirements  Branch,  Directorate  of  Personnel  Program  Mgmt,
AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed the application and  states  that  an  audit  confirmed
member had accumulated 19 years, 5 months,  and  11  days  for  active  duty
credit; therefore, he did not have the required 20 years and 1 day  required
for  service  retirement  eligibility.   They  recommended  disapproval   of
member’s request for regular retirement instead of VSI since member did  not
meet the eligibility requirements for service retirement.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force  evaluation  and  states  that  he  has
enclosed a copy of his last  VSI  Earnings  Statement  (1997).   Please  pay
special attention to block 13 on the form: “Total Active Service  (Months).”
 The number 240 is in that block.  If he  understands  correctly  what  that
block means, it means he has 240 months of active duty  service  upon  which
his VSI payment is computed.  If that is true, then 240 months is  equal  to
20 years of service.  This is the crux of his problem.   Previous  to  1995,
block 13 contained the number 232 and his VSI payment was  less.   When  the
numbers changed in block 13,  he  received  two  letters,  one  from  Denver
Accounting and Finance, and one from  Randolph  AFB.   The  Randolph  letter
stated: “we now count  time  not  previously  considered  as  ‘active  duty’
toward the  computation  of  your  VSI  payment  and  you  will  receive  an
additional payment to reflect this increase.”   He  soon  received  a  check
which reflected an incremental increase in the VSI payments for 1992,  1993,
1994, and 1995, and he  has  received  the  higher  payment  (based  on  240
months) ever since.

Applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Retirements Branch, Directorate,  Personnel  Program  Management,
AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed the application and states that the  applicant’s  Total
Active Duty Federal Military Service (TAFMS) is 19 years, 5 months,  and  11
days and he has reserve credit of 1 year and 9 days.  Of this reserve  time,
5 months and 6 days were already  credited  toward  the  TAFMS  Date.   This
leaves a reserve credit of 7 months and 3  days  of  inactive  duty/Extended
Course Institute and reserve  membership  points.   When  the  TAFMS  of  19
years, 5 months, and 11 days and the 7 months and 3  days  computed  by  the
1405 date are totaled, it equals 20 years and 14 days (240 months for  pay).
 By looking at block 13 of the VSI Earnings Statement produced  by  DFAS-CE,
it’s easy to misinterpret this as 240 months of Total Active Duty,  when  in
fact, it refers to both active and inactive service.  The change in his  pay
from 233 months to 240 was based on recomputation of his  service  dates  by
using 10 USC 1405 and for  some  unknown  reason  the  applicant’s  VSI  was
originally computed by his TAFMS.  In August 1995 the  correction  was  made
and his  pay  adjusted.   Although  the  applicant’s  Total  Active  Service
increased to 20 years and 14 days for pay purposes, it does not qualify  him
for active duty retirement which requires 20  years  and  1  day  of  active
duty.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 16 November 1998, for review and response.  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 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 probable error or injustice.  The  Air  Force  states  that  by
looking at block 13 of the Voluntary  Separation  Incentive  (VSI)  Earnings
Statement produced  by  Defense  Finance  and  Accounting  Service-Cleveland
Center (DFAS-CE), it is easy to misinterpret this as  240  months  of  Total
Active Duty, when in fact, it refers to both active  and  inactive  service.
They also state the change in his pay from 233 months to 240  was  based  on
recomputation of his service dates  by  using  10  USC  1405  and  for  some
unknown reason the applicant’s VSI was  originally  computed  by  his  Total
Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS).  The  applicant’s  records  do  not
reveal that he has served 20 years and 1 day on active duty to  qualify  for
retirement.  Therefore, 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 probable 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 26 January 1999 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

              Ms. Rita S. Looney, Panel Chair
              Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Member
          Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
              Ms. Gloria J. Williams, Examiner (without vote)

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 November 1997, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRR, dated 2 February 1998.
   Exhibit D.  Applicant’s response, dated 13 September 1998,
               w/atchs.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRR, dated 27 October 1998.
   Exhibit F.  Letters, AFBCMR, dated 9 February 1998 and
               16 November 1998.





                                   RITA S. LOONEY
                                   Panel Chair