Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00542
Original file (BC-2004-00542.doc) Auto-classification: Denied





                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00542
            INDEX CODE:  135.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given the Reserve Transition Plan (RTAP) monies he was  promised
at his early retirement or that he receive a full 20-year retirement.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 29 February 2000, he was involuntarily retired from  the  Ohio  Air
National Guard (OHANG) and promised Reserve Transition Assistance Plan
(RTAP) benefits.  In October 2000, he was told  he  would  receive  an
RTAP payment of $4000 in November 2000.   He  was  told  this  was  to
compensate him for his early  retirement.   He  did  not  receive  the
promised RTAP payment and called  the  OHANG  and  the  RTAP  benefits
office.  He was told his paperwork was misread and  that  he  was  not
eligible for RTAP.  He contacted his  representative  and  has  worked
through Senator Voinovich’s office for the better part of three  years
to get his situation resolved.

In support of his  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant, a Senior Master Sergeant (SMSgt/E-8)  with  the  OHANG,
was involuntarily retired and transferred to the Retired Reserve on  2
March 2000 as a result of force downsizing.  He was credited  with  18
years, 1 month, and 29 days of satisfactory service for retirement and
is eligible for Reserve retired pay at age 60.

_________________________________________________________________






AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPP recommends denial.  While DPP notes the ANG has the applicant
with 20 years of service in one record and 18 years, 1 month,  and  24
days in another, their research has yielded  that  the  applicant  did
not, in fact,  complete  20  years  of  satisfactory  service  towards
retirement under United States Code (U.S.C.) Title 10, Section  12731.
He did however, meet the  requirement  for  Reserve  retirement  under
U.S.C. Title 10 Section 12731a, which states the applicant  must  have
at least 15 years, but less than 20, of satisfactory service with  the
last six years of qualifying service in a Reserve component.  Since he
was involuntarily retired, he was eligible for RTAP benefits: however,
he was not entitled to any monetary benefit,  only  to  retire  early.
Therefore, on 2 March 2000, he was transferred to the Retired  reserve
and is eligible for retired pay at age 60.

DPP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
12 March 2004 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 timely filed.

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, 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.   It  appears  the  applicant  may  have  been
misinformed that he would be entitled to a  monetary  benefit  at  the
time of his involuntary separation.  However,  unless  he  could  show
that he relied on erroneous information to his detriment  in  electing
to voluntarily retire with less than 20 years of satisfactory service,
we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in
this application.  In this respect, we note  he  was  forced  to  seek
early retirement because of the downsizing of his unit.   Thus,  other
than the possibility of being disappointed because he did not  qualify
for a monetary benefit, he had no recourse except to do what he did in
order to qualify for Reserve retirement at age 60.



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-
2004-00542 in Executive Session on 27 April 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. James E. Short, Panel Chair
      Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
      Ms. Martha A.  Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Feb 04, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 10 Mar 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 04.




                                   JAMES E. SHORT
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02991

    Original file (BC-2003-02991.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Letter from HQ AFMC to applicant notifying her of two reassignment opportunities and her eligibility for RTAP. Letter from HQ AFMC to applicant notifying her of ARPC’s denial of her RTAP eligibility. DPP states the position offered her from ARPC was located in Denver, CO but that the Program Manager at DFAS-CO agreed to allow her to perform her IDT’s at the DFAS-San Antonio office thereby providing the same commuting distance she endured when assigned to Kelly AFB, TX.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00823

    Original file (BC-2005-00823.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPP states the applicant’s records indicate he completed 26 years, 3 months, and 6 days of honorable Federal service as of his discharge from the Air Force Reserve; however, only 18 years, 4 months, and 9 days of this time was satisfactory service creditable toward retirement pay eligibility. Since the applicant was discharged from the Air Force Reserve prior to the enactment of this provision of law, he is not eligible for RTAP pay or Reserve Retired pay. The evidence provided confirms...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02519

    Original file (BC-2002-02519.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 14 November 1991, for a period of six years. He had served a total of 22 years and 1 month of satisfactory service at the time of discharge, of which the last five were in the Air Force Reserve.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01484

    Original file (BC-2008-01484.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPR advises that in order to establish eligibility for Reserve retired pay under the provision of Title 10, U.S.C., Section 12731a, a member must complete 15, but less than 20 years of satisfactory service with the last 6 years of qualifying service in a Reserve component. The applicant did not complete 15 years of satisfactory service and there is no indication in his record that he was involuntarily separated from the Air National Guard. In this regard, Title 10, Section 12731a,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9502947

    Original file (9502947.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 95-02947 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: ecords of the Department of the Air Force relating corrected to show that he was honorably discharge Washington Air National Guard on 13 Jul95, with a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01194

    Original file (BC-2005-01194.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For her last partial year of Regular active duty, she was correctly credited with 11 months and 21 days of satisfactory service. 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 that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00035

    Original file (BC-2007-00035.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00035 INDEX CODE: 137.04 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 June 2008 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husband’s marital status be changed from “single” to “married” in the year 2001, and that his records be changed to show he elected to participate in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-03905

    Original file (BC-2004-03905.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, DPP contends, there is no provision of law that would allow a member to retire with entitlements and no pay. DPP’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that while he is no authority on retirement matters, he does believe that retirement after 15 years of service is allowable at times. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01047

    Original file (BC-2004-01047.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    No one told him however, that the six years required were considered qualifying years based on his retirement year ending date of July. In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of an Air Force DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, an Army National Guard (ARNG) NGB Form 22, an ANG NGB Form 22, an honorable discharge order, a memorandum from Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) regarding time necessary to retire with a Reserve retirement, a point...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03023

    Original file (BC-2003-03023.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The IG’s investigation was not obligated to determine the validity of Col “W’s” claims of the applicant’s performance but whether or not Col “W” abused his authority by ordering that the two OPR’s be written. He asks that the Board consider the documented record of his performance included in his application instead. In view of the above determination and in an effort to provide the applicant with appropriate relief, we recommend that his records be corrected to show that he was promoted...