RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02343
            INDEX CODE:

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Retention and Retirement Years Ending  (RYEs)  20  May  1978,  20 May
1985, and 20 May  1994,  be  considered  satisfactory  years  of  Federal
service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He will be unjustly denied retirement because the contested RYEs were not
satisfactory years of federal service.  In this  respect,  the  applicant
notes the following:

    a.  During RYE 20 May 1978, he moved overseas for a career broadening
experience and was placed on inactive Reserve status.  When he  returned,
he attempted to find a position in his wing; however, no  positions  were
available  because  the  wing  lost  25%  of  its  aircraft  and  support
personnel.  In addition,  he  attended  a  graduate  program  during  the
contested period.

    b.  During the RYE 20 May 1985, he contacted recruiters in  September
1984 and was not hired for a position until March 1985.  The  funding  of
his position and the group transitioning to a wing,  limited  his  hiring
date and participation during  this  RYE.   He  was  ready  and  able  to
participate prior to March 1985 but could not because of  the  transition
issue.

    c.  During the RYE 20 May 1994, he demonstrated his commitment to the
Reserves and his desire to continue his career by volunteering for points
only.  He was the only volunteer in a squadron of 400 members.

The applicant also states that since 1985, he met or exceeded the minimum
participation requirements for 10 years.  In 8  of  these  10  years,  he
significantly participated above the required minimum of 50  points.   In
his 13-year Reserve career, he completed  nearly  23  years  of  service;
however, only 18 years are being recognized for  retirement.   He  earned
more points in 13 years (1146 points) than  a  reservist  who  meets  the
minimum requirements earns over a 20-year period.

The applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 21 May 1977, the applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in the
Air Force Reserve and entered extended active  duty  (EAD)  on  18  April
1978.

During the RYE 20 May 1978, the applicant  earned  26  active  duty  (AD)
points and 15 membership points for a total of 41  total  and  retirement
points.  Since the applicant was awarded less than 50 retirements points,
the RYE was not considered a year of  satisfactory  Federal  service  for
retirement purposes.

On 27 November 1982, the applicant was released from EAD and  transferred
to the Non-Affiliated Non-Obligated Reserve Section (NARS).

On 1 March 1985, the applicant was reassigned to the 901st TAG,  Peterson
AFB, CO.

During the RYE 20 May 1985, the applicant earned  12  inactive  duty  for
training (IDT) points and 15 membership points for a total  of  27  total
and retirement points.  The RYE was not considered a year of satisfactory
Federal service.

On 31 March 1992, the applicant was assigned to  ARPC/DRMP/RRPS,  Denver,
CO, in an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) position.

During the RYE 20 May 1994, the applicant earned  2  AD  points,  17  IDT
points, and 15 membership points for a total of 34 total  and  retirement
points.  The RYE was  not  considered  a  year  of  satisfactory  Federal
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Director of Personnel  Program  Management,  ARPC/DP,  reviewed  this
application and states that  in  1977,  it  was  not  uncommon  for  some
officers to have an 11 to 11 ½-months delay before going on active  duty.
The practice at that time was for members to enter active  duty  to  meet
their Initial Qualification Training (IQT) report date.  This policy  has
since changed to enter members on active duty within  59  days  following
commission, unless they specifically request a later date of entry.   The
contract the applicant signed states that there could be up to a 12-month
delay before entry to EAD.  In regard to RYE 20 May 1985, they note  that
it is not uncommon for members to be notified early  of  selection  to  a
position, so when position funding  is  available  the  position  can  be
filled immediately.  He could not be reassigned to  the  unit  until  the
funding had been approved.   The  requirement  to  obtain  50  points  to
achieve a satisfactory year for  retirement  is  statutory  and  has  not
changed.  During RYE    20 May 1994, the applicant was given  a  list  of
available  Extension  Course  Institute  (ECI)  courses  he  could   have
completed to meet his requirement.  Therefore, they recommend  denial  of
the applicant’s requests.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 26 October 1998, for review and  response  within  30  days.
However, 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.   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
and adopt their rationale as  the  basis  for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or  injustice.   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 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
            Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
            Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member
            Mr. Phillip Horton, Examiner (without vote)

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Aug 98, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DP, dated 6 Oct 98.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Oct 98.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Panel Chair