RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00267
INDEX CODE: 128.10
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be credited with two additional years of creditable service.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was given two additional years of service (from 1938 through 1940) as an
adjusted service date; however, he has only been receiving pay for 28 years
of active service.
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his retirement
order. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted as an Aviation Cadet on 13 May 40 completing his
training on 31 Dec 40. He was appointed to the temporary grade of second
lieutenant effective 30 Dec 40 with a date of rank of 16 Jan 41. He was
progressively promoted to the temporary grade of colonel, having assumed
that grade effective and with a date of rank of 10 Jan 56, and to the
permanent grade of colonel effective and with a date of rank of 22 Jul 59.
He continually served on active duty until 31 Jul 68 at which time he was
retired. He served 28 years, 2 months, and 18 days on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAOR recommends denial. DPPAOR states that the applicant does not
have creditable service for the years 1938 through 1940. On 8 Dec 39, he
made application for appointment as a Flying Cadet and enlisted as a flying
cadet on 13 May 40. His service credit began on 13 May 40. His retirement
order is correct. The DPPAOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
DFAS-RPB-TQAL states that if it is determined that the applicant is
entitled to the additional service credit his pay will be retroactively
adjusted accordingly. The DFAS-RPB-TQAL evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant states that he has been paid for 28 years service based on entry
on active duty as a Flying Cadet on 13 May 40. He retired on 31 Jul 68
upon completion of nine months loan to the Department of Transportation. A
retired friend of his told him that he retired with 30 years of service for
pay purposes. He entered Flying School in 1942 and retired in 1970 and was
given an extra two years service based on his promotion list service. He
knows of several others given credit for promotion list service for pay
purposes. Apparently promotion list service was not considered in his
case.
In support of his request, applicant provided an extract from the Air Force
register. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
USAF/JAA recommends denial. JAA states the promotion list service date is
established by law and is used to determine a regular officer's proper
position on the lineal list, to establish eligibility criteria for
consideration for permanent promotion, and to determine the permanent grade
date of rank. It is not, however, used to determine the years of
creditable service that the officer accumulates for retirement pay
purposes. It merely determines the individual's seniority for grade
determination. The JAA evaluation is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 19 Dec 03 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case. However, the
promotion list service has a number of applications, none of which appear
to be to determine an officer's years of creditable service. Evidence has
not been presented by the applicant, which would lead us to believe
otherwise. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the
Air Force offices 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. 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 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-2003-
00267 in Executive Session on 17 Feb 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
Mr. Robert Altman, Member
Mr. Albert Ellett, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAOR, dated 8 Apr 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, DFAS-RPB-TQAL, dated 21 Mar 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Apr 03.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Apr 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, USAF/JAA, dated 17 Nov 03.
Exhibit H. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.
JOHN L. ROBUCK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-00015
The agreement also addressed that recoupment would occur if, and when, the applicant became eligible for retired pay, so the claims made by the applicant are clearly unfounded when he states that he did not know that his Reserve retired pay would be recouped for the SSB payment. AFPC/DPPRRP noted the applicant has requested an active duty retirement effective on his date of separation on 5 Jun 92. They stated the applicant did not have sufficient active service to request an active duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | bc-2003-01127
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-RPB-TQAL/CL recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant was credited with continuous service from 6 November 1967 to 1 March 1992. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, the office of primary responsibility has reviewed his service total and determined that he has been credited with continuous service from the date he began active duty (6 November 1967)...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03854
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03854 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Retired pay grade be changed to the grade of Technical Sergeant (TSgt/E-6). He was relieved from active duty, on 31 Dec 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-3203, with a reason for separation of voluntary retirement: sufficient service for...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00561
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00561 INDEX CODE: 112.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 Aug 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he has 21 years, 7 months, and 8 days of total active service, rather than 19 years and 20 days. He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 30 Jun 58 for a...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2007-03726
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are at Exhibits B and H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-RPB-TQAL/CL indicates that in order to make an election into the SBP open season, a payment of a buy in premium was required to cover the period of time...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00061
Since he has been reinstated to active duty as though he never retired, he should not have been required to pay SBP premiums as an active duty member. 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. Therefore, we find no evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03742
On 1 March 2001, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) determined he was unfit and recommended his placement on TDRL status with 30% disability. The DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit C. The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted. We are not persuaded by the evidence presented that the applicant’s discharge from the Air Force because of physical...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02431
However, he was placed on the retired list effective 1 June 2001 and received retired pay through November 2001. Although he was selected for continuation on active duty, the Retirements Processing Section at AFPC was not notified until after the 1 June 2001 retirement had consummated in MilPDS. The AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: While AFPC contends he was an active duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01428
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01428, Cse 2 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be changed to reflect his active service for retirement as 20 years, 6 months, and 29 days versus 20 years, 5 months and 26 days. A complete copy of the DFAS evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPD...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00117
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She took her oath of office and became a member of the Air Force on 29 Mar 63, which would credit her with over 20 years of service for purposes of qualifying her for the CRDP. 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...