RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-01064
            INDEX CODES:  110.03, 135.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Seven years and five months of the  time  he  spent  in  the  Inactive
Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS) be removed from his records.

He be reinstated in the Air National Guard (ANG) and be credited  with
points and pay retroactive to 10 Jan 00.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Total Federal  Commissioned  Service  Date  (TFCSD),  Total  Years
Service Date (TYSD), Pay Date, and Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) are
in error.

Until 10 Jan 00, he was a lieutenant colonel in the Iowa Air  National
Guard.  With his five years in the active Air  Force,  he  had  almost
eighteen years of military service when he was  informed  in  Jan  00,
that he would be discharged immediately.  This was a devastating  blow
to his hopes for a full career in the  military  as  well  as  to  his
financial security.

He never realized the significance of the  first  erroneous  personnel
action that was made in his military career.  It  occurred  after  his
discharge from the active duty Air Force. He was assigned to ISLRS for
a period of ten years and five months.  He should have  been  screened
out of ISLRS after a three-year period.  As  a  result,  when  he  was
appointed in the ANG on 7 Mar 87, he was unable to qualify for  twenty
years of satisfactory service for retirement based upon  his  adjusted
service dates.  Officials at the Air Reserve Personnel  Center  (ARPC)
and the National Guard Bureau (NGB) have given his Air National  Guard
State Headquarters inconsistent and conflicting  guidance  since  1998
regarding his MSD and promotion eligibility.  The confusion began when
the new Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA) replaced  the
old Reserve Officer Personnel Act (ROPA) on 1  Oct  96.   Federal  law
established  his  MSD  as  1 Jul 98.   As  his  MSD  approached,   his
Headquarters was given guidance from ARPC and NGB to retain him  since
MSDs under the new ROPMA act were abolished for officers in the  grade
of major and below.  His MSD  was  deleted  from  the  Personnel  Data
System (PDS).  His Headquarters was also told that if he were promoted
to lieutenant colonel, his MSD would be changed to reflect the date he
would reach twenty satisfactory  years.   He  met  a  ROPMA  mandatory
promotion board in June  1999.   He  was  promoted  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel, effective 18 Nov 99 with a promotion service  date
of the same.  His MSD never was changed to 31 Mar 02 like ARPC and NGB
promised.  Instead, direction was given from  ARPC  that  he  must  be
discharged immediately because his mandatory retirement date of 1  Jul
98 was still valid.  The end result is that he  was  treated  unfairly
and  discharged  from  the  Iowa  ANG,  on  10  Jan  00,  because   of
circumstances beyond his  control.  His  discharge  before  completing
twenty years of satisfactory service was based upon an erroneous  TYSD
and TFCSD.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, supportive  statements,  and  extracts  from  his  military
personnel records.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application 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 Director of Assignments, ARPC/DPA, reviewed this  application  and
recommended denial.  DPA  noted  that  the  applicant  was  originally
commissioned as a second lieutenant in the United States Air Force  on
3 Jun 70 from the United  States  Air  Force  Academy.   This  initial
commission was a regular  officer  appointment  incurring  a  six-year
military service obligation (MSO), establishing an expiration term  of
obligation (ETO) of 2 Jun 76.  The applicant served on extended active
duty (EAD) with the Air Force from  3  Jun  70  to  15  Jun  75.   The
applicant was discharged from EAD on 15 Jun 75 and accepted a  Reserve
appointment on 15 Jun 75, for an indefinite period of  time.   He  was
assigned  to  the  Obligated  Reserve  Section  (ORS)  at   ARPC   and
transferred to the Non-Affiliated Reserve Section (NARS) on 16 Jun 75.
 Applicant was transferred to ISLRS on 5 Oct 76.

According to DPA, the  applicant  remained  in  ISLRS  for  10  years,
5 months, and 2 days; retention was  in  accordance  with  AFR  35-41,
Volume I, paragraph 3-15, dated 30 Sep 75.  DPA indicated that  normal
retention in  ISLRS  is  three  years,  unless  ARPC  determines  that
retention would benefit the Air Force.  There was no evidence that the
applicant was informed by ARPC of the implications  of  his  continued
commissioned status in ISLRS, nor does the  applicant  state  that  he
ever solicited information from ARPC concerning his status  in  ISLRS.
The  applicant  accepted  an  Iowa  ANG   appointment   on   7 Mar 87.
Furthermore, the applicant stated he knew he  would  not  qualify  for
twenty years of  satisfactory  service  for  retirement  when  he  was
appointed in the ANG.  Applicant was  initially  informed  by  letter,
dated 6 Mar 98, that his MSD would expire on 2 Jul  98.   The  MSD  is
established by the United States Code, Title  10,  Section  14507  (28
years commissioned service) and cannot be  changed.   Applicant’s  MSD
was removed from the system by the ANG and he was allowed to  continue
participating until discharged on 10 Jan 00.

DPA stated that while it  is  regrettable  that  the  applicant  never
understood the implications of his ISLRS status until after he started
the Air National Guard participation, the applicant did  realize  that
he still held Air Force Reserve commissioned status.  If the  7  years
and 5 months in ISLRS time is removed by discharge, it  will  cause  a
break in service requiring  the  pay  date,  TFCSD,  and  TYSD  to  be
adjusted.  Adjustment of the pay date could result  in  the  applicant
incurring a recoupment, having been over paid from 7 Mar 87 to 10  Jan
00.

A complete copy of the DPA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit
C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 8 Sep
00 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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  probable  error  or  injustice.   The  applicant's
complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his  contentions  were
duly noted.  However, we do not find the applicant’s assertions or his
supporting  documentation  sufficiently  persuasive  to  warrant   any
corrective action.  The applicant contends that he never realized  the
implications of his ISLRS  status  until  after  he  started  his  ANG
participation.  While there was no evidence that he  was  informed  by
ARPC of the implication of his continued commissioned status in ISLRS,
no evidence has been presented which would lead  us  to  believe  that
that he was ever proactive regarding his status.  In our  view,  after
remaining in ISLRS for such a lengthy period of  time,  the  applicant
shares some responsibility for his status.  Furthermore, the available
evidence reveals that the applicant signed a statement indicating that
he had been counseled regarding completing 20  years  of  satisfactory
service prior to his mandatory removal from active status  because  of
maximum service.  He further stated that he understood that  he  would
not be able to obtain 20 years of satisfactory service for  retirement
prior to his obtaining 28 years of service  computed  from  his  total
years service date.  It should be pointed  out  that  the  applicant’s
dedicated years of service  to  his  country  and  his  exemplary  and
distinguished  career  has  not  gone   unnoticed   by   this   Board.
Notwithstanding this, in the absence of clear-cut  evidence  that  the
applicant was ill-advised concerning his ISLRS status, or that he  was
treated differently than  other  similarly  situated  individuals,  we
agree with the recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility (OPR) and conclude that the  applicant  has  failed  to
sustain his burden of establishing that  he  has  suffered  either  an
error or an injustice.  Accordingly, 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 1 Nov 00, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
      Mr. E. David Hoard, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 00, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPA, dated 21 Aug 00.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 8 Sep 00.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Panel Chair