RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00682
INDEX CODE: 129.04
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be placed on the Reserve Retired List at the rank of first
lieutenant (highest grade held).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Upon application for retirement, her request to be placed on the
Reserve Retired List at the highest grade she held (1lt) was denied
due to unclear provisions of the law. If she had retired at her 20-
year active duty point (30 September 2004), she would have retired as
a 1Lt. However, since she continued her service as a Traditional
Guardsman, she was retired as a master sergeant effective 1 December
2005.
In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided copies of her
retirement order, and three DD Form 214’s, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant, a retired member of the Arizona Air National Guard (AZANG),
began her military service on 8 June 1977. She was appointed as an
officer on 25 May 1979. She served as an officer until 31 August
1983, when she was released from active duty due to non-selection for
promotion. She enlisted with the AZANG on 1 September 1983 and was
progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant. She was
retired effective 1 December 2005 and transferred to the Air Force
Retired List after serving a combination of Regular and Reserve
service for pay of over 28 years.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPP recommends denial. DPP states her contention she would have
retired in the grade of 1Lt if she had retired at an earlier date is
incorrect. In order to retire immediately in an officer grade, a
member must have at least 10 years of active federal commissioned
service. She was appointed on 25 May 1979 and served as an officer
until 31 August 1983, the date she was released from active duty due
to non selection for promotion. Since she did not hold her commission
for 10 years, she was not eligible to retire in the higher grade of
1Lt. Both provisions of law that deal with Reservists retiring at a
higher grade (Title 10, United States Code, Sections 8914 and 8961)
require the member to be on active duty at the time of retirement.
She was in a Traditional status when she retired.
DPP’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
She contends she was one of the first military members to be
discharged from the officer ranks and opt to reenlist into an enlisted
position. She was told at the time, she would be able to retire at
her officer’s rank. She note’s her retired pay is currently being
offset by recoupment of severance pay she received when she was
discharged as an officer.
Applicant’s response is at 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 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 its rationale as the basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. She ultimately did not meet the requirement to
retire at the highest grade held as she did not serve 10 satisfactory
years as a commissioned officer. 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 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-
2006-00682 in Executive Session on 16 May 2006, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Feb 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 23 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Mar 06.
Exhibit D. Applicant’s response, dated 26 Apr 06.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01517
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01517 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Four points be added to her Point Credit summary for the Retention/Retirement (R/R) year of 4 January 2005 to 3 January 2006. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 May 06, w/atchs. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02700
Due to an administrative error by the ARPC retirement technician, the case was not sent to SAFPC for a grade determination and the incorrect grade of senior master sergeant (E-8) was placed on the retirement order. In Thomas, the veteran requested a change in record because of the inequity that would occur otherwise, Id. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03440
Although assignment to ISLRS is a break in active Reserve status, and an officer’s date of rank is adjusted accordingly, since they are ineligible for promotion consideration, it is not a break in service. Although applicant had four years, four months, and 12 days of non- participating service, he has had no break in service, and no error or injustice occurred with his assignment to ISLRS and subsequent change to his R/R date. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01854
As he had reached his maximum age of service, he applied for retirement as a Reserve of the Air Force and he was retired in his federally recognized grade of MG. The CGO’s deny the authority for a member, previously retired and in receipt of retired pay to “re-retire” and be credited for time served and a higher grade acquired after retirement. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02812
She receives DVA disability benefits; however, her severance pay is being recouped by the DVA. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPP recommends denial. The issue of the DVA recouping the disability severance pay from her DVA disability compensation does not change the fact that the applicant chose to accept disability severance pay in lieu of Reserve retired pay.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01948
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: ARPC/DPP recommends denial and states in part the applicant was correctly transferred to the Honorary Retired Reserve and is not eligible to transfer to the Retired Reserve with eligibility for Reserve retired pay and benefits. Since the applicant did not complete 15 years of satisfactory service and was transferred to the Honorary Retired Reserve prior to 5 October 1994, he is not eligible for Reserve...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01235
Special Order AA-0430, dated 24 10 June 2005, indicates in paragraph 3, “NO TRAVEL AUTHORIZED.” The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits B and C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPP recommends the applicant’s request be denied. DPP states according to the JFTR, members are...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00869
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She and another unit member contacted HQ Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) in July 2006 and inquired as to whether or not her duty status needed to be altered on orders. DPP notes her statement that she was unable to perform IDT training on 13 August 2005 because the entire building was closed on that Saturday and training was not available. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03153
On 30 Jun 69, he was promoted to the Reserve grade of lieutenant colonel. The highest grade he held during his career was lieutenant colonel and he is receiving retired pay in the correct grade. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice that would warrant advancement of the applicant's grade on the Reserve retired list.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01913
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01913 INDEX CODE: 135.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be awarded 24 months of credit for a Master’s Degree in Business Administration from CA Coast University to allow her appointment in the Air Force Reserves on 1 July 1999 as a First Lieutenant and her date of rank to Captain be...