Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102537
Original file (0102537.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02537
                 INDEX CODE:  135.02
                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given a satisfactory year for retirement year ending (RYE) 1  October
1993.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon his release from active duty, he transferred to the Air  Force  Reserve
and never received an  orientation  from  his  unit  of  assignment  on  the
requirements needed for proper credit toward a  good  year  for  retirement.
The Individual Mobilization Augmentation (IMA) program leaves a lot of  room
for improvement.  Members are left  to  seek  for  themselves  any  personal
support they need.  He  is  now  with  the  Air  National  Guard  where  the
newcomers are briefed and  educated.   If  he  had  that  support  upon  his
assignment to the Cat B position in the Air Force Reserve, he would  not  be
asking for the credit.  He admits that it was his responsibility  to  review
his AF Form 526, ANG/USAFR Point Credit Summary,  but  it  wasn’t  until  he
thought he had 20 years and was planning for retirement that  he  discovered
he did not have proper credit.  It was the recommendation  of  his  Military
Personnel Flight to apply for this correction.

In support of his application, the applicant submits copies of AF Form  526,
DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), AF  Form
1288 (Application for Ready Reserve Assignment) and ARPC Reserve  Order  JE-
1626.  The applicant’s submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 October 1992, the applicant was released form the Regular Air Force  in
the grade of staff sergeant (E-5).  He was credited with  11  years  and  10
days of active duty service.  On 2 October 1992 he transferred  to  the  Air
Force Reserve as a Category B  IMA  attached  to  the  391  Security  Police
Squadron at Goodfellow AFB, TX.  On 12 March 1993 he was released  from  the
Air Force Reserve and was assigned to the Air Nation Guard at Selfridge,  MI
where he is currently serving in the grade of master  sergeant  (E-7).   For
the Reserve/Retirement (R/R) Year 2 October 1992 to 1 October 1993,  he  was
credited  with  1  active  duty  point,  28  inactive  duty  points  and  15
membership for a total of 44  points.   Subsequent  to  that  time,  he  has
earned satisfactory years of Federal service.  Information in the  Personnel
Data System (PDS) reveals that, as of the Retirement  Year  Ending  (RYE)  1
October 2000, he was credited with 18 years  and  10  days  of  satisfactory
Federal service.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPP indicated that when individuals  are  assigned  to  Reserve  units
they are given information regarding their  participation  requirements  for
the position.  Title 10, United  States  Code,  Section  12732  requires  an
individual  to  accrue  50  points   per   retention/retirement   year   for
satisfactory service.  There are no provisions  in  the  law  to  waive  the
minimum point requirement.  The applicant earned  44  points  for  retention
year ending 1 October 1993.  Since  there  is  no  indication  an  error  or
injustice occurred, DPP recommends the application be  denied.   A  complete
copy of the advisory is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  Evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and response.  As of this date, this office has received no  response
(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.   We  took  notice   of   the
applicant's complete submission  in  judging  the  merits  of  the  case  to
include  his  assertion  that  he  was  not  adequately   briefed   on   the
requirements  for  his  position  upon  entering  the  Air  Force   Reserve.
However, we agree with the opinion  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis  for
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  Furthermore, the Board is of the opinion it was  incumbent  upon
the applicant to be  aware  of  what  constituted  a  satisfactory  year  of
federal service towards  his  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 11 December 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
      Mr. William E. Anderson, Member
      Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Aug 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 29 Oct 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Nov 01.




                                   PEGGY E. GORDON
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03132

    Original file (BC-2007-03132.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    His record does not show unsatisfactory service (less than 50 points earned) until Retirement Year Ending (RYE) 18 January 2000. A correction was made, and his record now shows 91 AD points, 20 IDT points, 0 ECI points, 15 membership points, 126 total retirement points, and a year of satisfactory service for RYE 18 January 2002. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00705

    Original file (BC-2003-00705.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For RYE 29 Dec 93, the applicant did not earn any points from Sep 93 through Dec 93, then after two consecutive satisfactory federal service years, the applicant received another unsatisfactory year, and did not earn points from Sep 96 through Dec 96. According to Air Force Manual 36-8001, para 2.2, “points may only be credited to the date a member actually performed the duty.” The applicant was credited with points and in the proper retirement years. Based on the evidence of record and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01372

    Original file (BC-2003-01372.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told when he became an individual mobilization augmentee (IMA) that his retention/retirement (R/R) date was 5 Dec and that he needed to earn 50 points between 5 Dec and 4 Dec to have a “good year.” At some point his records were audited and his R/R date was changed to 30 Jan, but he was never notified of the change. This recommendation will provide the applicant a satisfactory year of service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03370

    Original file (BC-2002-03370.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Points for participation can only be credited for the dates the inactive duty was performed. Correction to the advisory is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the evaluation and indicated that although the Reserve Order DA-01859 does assign him to the 514th AMW as an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) he was in fact hired as a full-time Air Reserve Technician (ART). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00398

    Original file (BC-2010-00398.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00398 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect an additional two non-paid inactive duty points and six paid inactive duty training points and satisfactory service for retirement year ending (RYE) 5 September 1990. Documentation does not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001651

    Original file (0001651.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ ARPC/DPP, reviewed this application and stated the record showed that the applicant completed two annual tours of active duty from 17 – 27 September 1992 and 16 – 27 August 1993. They indicated the record also showed for RYE 15 September 1992, the applicant did not complete an annual tour. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101520

    Original file (0101520.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 July 2001 for review and response within 30 days. In the absence of evidence indicating he was treated differently from other similarly situated members, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03272

    Original file (BC-2008-03272.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice as there is no evidence that he did not have sufficient opportunity during the 10 months after his assignment to the 37 th SFS to earn the additional 16 points he needed for a satisfactory year of service for RYE 9 January 2008. The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01365

    Original file (BC-2003-01365.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In their assessment of her claim, the Air Force office of primary responsibility confirms the applicant’s claim concerning the base closing and has recommended her request for credit for a satisfactory year of Federal service for the RYE 4 January 1994 be approved. Since the applicant did not participate a full year towards an active duty retirement, the year cannot be counted as a satisfactory year of federal service. Accordingly, in the absence of evidence indicating she was treated...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02100

    Original file (BC-2005-02100.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was credited with the proper active and inactive duty points. Moreover, the source documents provided by the applicant, verify active duty points were correctly recorded on the point credit summaries and did not refute the existing inactive duty points. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Reserve Personnel Center and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.