SECOND ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02538
INDEX CODE: 135.05
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests he be credited
with six months of active federal service.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
A similar appeal requesting reinstatement to active reserve status for a
period of one to seven years so the congressionally authorized promotion
board action was not circumvented was considered and denied by the Board on
2 November 2004. For an accounting of the facts and the rationale of the
earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with
attachments, at Exhibit F.
Applicant’s request for reconsideration was considered and denied by the
Board on 17 May 2005, see Addendum, with attachment, at Exhibit I.
On his request, dated 31 May 06, the applicant requests his records be
reviewed to determine if he was penalized six months of active service
based on being inadvertently discharged while in Palace Option status. To
support his appeal, applicant submitted a personal statement and other
supporting documents.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit J.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant was enlisted in the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps
(AFROTC) program on 28 August 1972. The Project Palace Option was a
program whereby an officer may volunteer for transfer from active military
service, prior to fulfillment of their active duty service commitment or
term of enlistment, to a Selected Reserve position for an extended
commitment. Upon termination of active duty, the applicant was assigned to
the Obligated Reserve Section. Eventually in December 1980 he was assigned
to an Air Force Reserve Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) position
and in December 1981, he transferred to an Air Force Reserve position at
Bergstrom AFB. The applicant states in his 31 May 2006 letter that his
permanent records reflect the 1985 date and not his actual starting date of
12 December 1981. According to the records, they did not show the
applicant having a break in service since his commission on 10 May 1974.
The applicant attached a copy of his inactive duty training on 11, 12 and
13 December 1981 which was credited to his retention/retirement year 10 May
1981 through 9 May 1982. The retention/retirement date of 30 September was
reestablished in 1997 and the points were realigned to the 10 May
retention/retirement date (based on his commissioning service date). After
a review of the additional documents submitted by the applicant, they did
not find additional service not previously taken into consideration when
the applicant’s Mandatory Separation Date of 31 May 2004 was established.
HQ ARPC/DPP complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit K.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Having been provided the advisory opinion, the applicant submitted a
personal statement for the Board’s review in which he pointed out that he
was ordered to involuntary Palace Option, and was inadvertently discharged
from Palace Option in error. However, he later received a letter
indicating the erroneous release from service was corrected. Additionally,
he related other activities while serving as a lieutenant which are missing
from his records.
The applicant’s complete review is at Exhibit M.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support
of the appeal, we found no evidence warranting a correction to the record.
The applicant believes he was penalized with a reduction of six months
credit from retirement. Based on the evidence of record and that verified
by Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center (HQ ARPC), the applicant was
given credit for all of his service during his career. After a thorough
review of the applicant’s records, the Board found no evidence of a break
in service since his commission on 10 May 74. Therefore, we agree with the
opinion and recommendation of the Air Reserve Personnel Center 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 applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issues involved.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application in Executive
Session on 4 December 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 19 Nov 04
with Exhibits.
Exhibit I. Addendum to the Recording of Proceedings,
dated 26 Aug 05, with Exhibits.
Exhibit J. Letter, Applicant, dated 31 May 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit K. Letter, HQ ARPC/DPP, dated 28 Sep 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit L. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Sep 06, w/atch.
Exhibit M. Applicant’s Letter, dated 20 Oct 06, w/atchs.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02539
After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. The applicant argues he was promoted during this time of war to meet the needs of the Air Force Reserve for experienced colonels and the denial of his exception to policy waiver to be extended beyond his mandatory separation date (MSD) creates an injustice...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01357
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge records should indicate the rank of second lieutenant. After reviewing the applicant’s records, there is no indication he was ever commissioned as an officer in either the Air Force or the Air Force Reserves. Therefore, 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02587
A review of her record indicates she completed the service requirements for Reserve retired pay, however, there is no indication she ever applied for retirement. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02894
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPP recommends this application be forwarded to the Air Force Personnel Center’s (AFPC) Medical Disability Branch for their review and advisory regarding the member's request for a medical retirement. ARPC/DPPP noted that a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) found the applicant medically unfit to perform his duty. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit...
In this regard, the applicant apparently believed that certain inactive periods with the USPHS were creditable towards satisfactory service and, as a medical officer, he would be retained until age 68. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that: a. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-00932 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01310
His next seven years of service were not considered satisfactory years of service and did not count towards a Reserve retirement. DPP’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Applicant agrees the only issue to resolve is that of whether or not 352 days of satisfactory service constitutes a satisfactory year of service or not. Therefore, since the applicant had...
For a reserve member to be credited with a year of satisfactory service, 50 retirement points are required. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant contends that he performed numerous days of creditable service that were not documented for which he received no credit. Based on the evidence of record and that verified by HQ Air Reserve Personnel Center...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02991
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-2004-02812
Her record shows she completed 15 years, 10 months, and 21 days of honorable federal service as of 18 August 1993. Regarding early qualification for retired pay for members who were medically disqualified for duty, a member must have completed at least 15 years, but less than 20 years, of satisfactory federal service and been medically disqualified for military service on or after 5 October 1994. In this case she would have been eligible for a Reserve retirement at age 60 as she would have...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00974
Under the provisions of Palace Chase at that time, his remaining service obligation (from November 1972 through March 1976) was required to be completed at Travis AFB, drilling with the 82nd Aerial Port Reserve Squadron. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show he was credited with 12 non- paid inactive duty points for the period...