RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02687
            INDEX CODE: 135.05, 135.01
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  5 Mar 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) be extended  from  1 Jun  2010  to
1 May 2014 for a break in service of 3 years, 11 months from 22 Oct 92
to 17 Sep 96.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her current MSD is the result of administrative  errors  resulting  in
insufficient details on options and associated consequences during her
out-processing.  When she resigned her Regular commission, she was not
properly briefed  on  the  consequences  of  immediately  obtaining  a
Reserve commission versus waiting to obtain the  commission  when  she
resumed  participation  in  the  Reserves.   There   was   significant
confusion on the  terms/requirements  associated  with  the  Voluntary
Separation Incentive  (VSI)  and  Special  Separations  Benefit  (SSB)
options.  She was only recently  made  aware  of  the  possibility  of
having her MSD extended when she received career guidance as  part  of
her upcoming 0-6 promotion board.  She  was  getting  advice  on  what
assignments, etc., she should be looking at  based  on  her  years  of
service when she mentioned her MSD was impacted as she had a break  in
participation that resulted in almost four years of  lost  ability  to
serve.  She was advised this was an error she could work to resolve if
she wanted to be able to continue her service beyond her current  MSD.
She  believes  her  extensive  experience  and  capabilities   warrant
extending her ability to serve.

In support of her request, the applicant provided a copy of  her  duty
history.  Her complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 7 Jul 92, the applicant requested the VSI annuity  and  incurred  a
contract which expires on 21 Oct 2012.

On 21 Oct 92, after 10  years  and  2  days  of  active  service,  the
applicant  resigned  her  Regular  active  duty  commission  and   was
transferred to the USAF Reserve (USAFR).  She was  first  assigned  to
the  Nonobligated-Nonparticipating  Ready  Reserve  Personnel  Section
(NNRPS) and later to the Inactive Status List Reserve Section  (ISLRS)
effective 22 Oct 95.  On 18 Sep 96, the applicant accepted a  Selected
Reserve (SR) assignment.

The  applicant’s  MSD  was  established   from   her   Total   Federal
Commissioned Service Date (TFCSD) in accordance with  Title  10,  USC,
Section 14507(a).  Her TFCSD is 8 May 82 and her MSD was  computed  as
1 Jun 2010 based on the first day of the following month in which  she
completed 28 years of commissioned service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPP recommends denial.  The applicant has a VSI  contract  and
also signed a Statement of Understanding (SOU) on 30 Jun  92,  stating
her application to separate from the Air Force and receive VSI was  an
irrevocable action on her part.  If the Board approved the appeal, the
applicant’s MSD would be  1 May  2014  and  the  Defense  Finance  and
Accounting Service (DFAS) would need to determine if recoupment of the
VSI payments is appropriate.

The complete HQ ARPC/DPP evaluation, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 27 Oct 06 for review and comment within 30 days  (Exhibit
C).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRRP firmly recommends denial.  The applicant’s current  MSD
of 1 Jun 2010 is based on her TAFCSD of 8 May 82, in  accordance  with
Title 10, USC, Section 14507(a).  Because she is a  LTC,  her  MSD  is
calculated as 8 May 82 + 28 years = 7 May 2010; 1 Jun 06 is the  first
day of the month after which she reaches her 28 years of TFCS.  An MSD
is not adjusted due to non-participation in a  Reserve  component.  If
she is promoted to Reserve colonel, Title 10,  USC,  Section  14507(b)
would  apply  and  her  MSD  could  be  adjusted  to  1 Jun  2012.  HQ
AFPC/DPPRRP discusses the provisions  of  the  VSI  and  SSB  programs
offered at the time of the applicant’s separation. Both  the  VSI  and
SSB programs required immediate transfer to a Reserve  component  upon
discharge or separation.  There is and was no  option  to  delay  that
transfer until the applicant was able  to  find  a  Reserve  position.
Consequently, under either SSB or  VSI,  she  would  have  immediately
transferred on 22 Oct 92 to NNRPS as a Reserve  commissioned  officer.
There is no “break in service” as the applicant contends. Even  though
she did not participate in a unit or individual Reserve program for  3
years and 11 months from 22 Oct 92  to  18 Sep  96,  that  time  still
accounts for her TFCSD of 8 May 82 and cannot be adjusted because  she
did not participate.  She was,  nonetheless,  a  Reserve  commissioned
officer during this period because she accepted the VSI that  required
her to be a Reserve commissioned officer beginning on 22 Oct 92.   Had
she selected the SSB, she would also  have  been  transferred  to  the
NNRPS on 22 Oct 92 as a Reserve commissioned officer.  To  extend  her
MSD from Jun 2010 to May 2014 is not only contrary to law but would be
inequitable and patently unjust to every Reserve  officer  other  than
the applicant.  Whether participating in an individual or unit  Active
Reserve Component (ARC) or not, as long as a Reserve LTC  is  assigned
to the ARC, the MSD is fixed at the first day of the month  after  the
month the officer attains 28 years of TFCS.  Also, if the  Board  does
adjust her MSD, she would have met  later  promotion  boards  and  her
current date of rank to the grade of  LTC  that  she  currently  holds
would not  longer  be  valid.   Promotion  “gates”  are  based  on  an
officer’s TFCSD.  If her MSD is adjusted to a future  date,  it  would
necessitate that her TFCSD be adjusted to a later  date,  which  would
also adjust when she would meet not only her  upcoming  0-6  promotion
board but also  previous  promotion  boards  to  0-4  and  0-5.   This
adjustment would result in recoupment of pay she received as  a  major
and as a LTC because she would not have been eligible for promotion by
the selection boards she has already met.

A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/DPPRRP advisory is provided at  Exhibit
D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the additional Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded
to the applicant on 1 Dec 06 for review and  comment  within  30  days
(Exhibit E).  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 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   HQ
AFPC/DPPRRP and adopt its rationale as the basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error  or  injustice.
In this respect, both the VSI  and  SSB  programs  required  immediate
transfer to a Reserve component upon discharge or  separation.   There
was and is  no  option  to  delay  that  transfer.   Even  though  the
applicant did not participate in a unit or individual Reserve  program
for nearly four years, she was a Reserve commissioned officer and this
period still accounts for her TFCSD. Also, if her  MSD  was  adjusted,
and we do not believe it should be, she would have met later promotion
boards and her date of rank to the grade of  LTC  that  she  currently
holds would not  longer  be  valid.   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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 23 January 2007 under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-02687 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Aug 06, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPP, dated 20 Oct 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 20 Nov 06.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 1 Dec 06.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair