RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03978
INDEX CODE: 110.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His current Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) of 1 May 2014 be adjusted
to 30 September 2014 to allow him to reach active duty sanctuary and
eventually qualify for a 20-year active duty retirement.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When he entered the Active/Guard Reserve (AGR) program, he was led to
believe he would be able to obtain a full 20-year active duty
retirement. It wasn’t until he visited the Air Reserve Personnel
Center (ARPC) that he found out his MSD would occur prior to him
reaching an active duty retirement or sanctuary for such. While he is
aware that should he be promoted to the grade of colonel prior to his
MSD, his MSD would be extended by two years and thereby make this
request moot, he contends he cannot rely on the possibility of a
promotion to make financial decisions today based on a full active
duty retirement he may not receive.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal
statement and a copy of his point credit summary and his AGR
application.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant began his career on 9 May 1978. He has been progressively
promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel (Lt Col) with a date of
rank (DOR) of 9 June 2003. As of 10 May 2006, he has almost 10 years
of active duty time. He has over 28 satisfactory years of service
towards a Reserve retirement at age 60. He is currently serving on
active duty with the Georgia Air National Guard (GAANG).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1P0F recommends denial. A1P0F states his MSD was established
prior to his application for an AGR tour. As he needs over two years
of service before actually becoming retirement eligible, no current
statute exists to provide him with an extension to his MSD.
A1P0F’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3
July 2007 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 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
National Guard 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. 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-
2006-03978 in Executive Session on 16 August 2007, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. B.J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1P0F, dated 21 Feb 07.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 07.
B. J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02838
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His time in grade (TIG) requirement from 1Lt to Captain was met on 3 August 2006. Therefore, his promotion to captain should be retroactive to that date. 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 National Guard office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03109
In fact, due to an administrative error, she continued to serve beyond her MSD of 1 June 2006 and was only separated after the error was discovered. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant disagrees with NGB’s opinions and has provided numerous points of contention along with explanations for each. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we can find no documented instance...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-03810
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03810 INDEX CODE: 131.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 June 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His promotion effective date (PED) and his date of rank (DOR) to the grade of major be changed from 18 October 2006 to 1 May 2006. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-02538
He questions how his personal medical costs are going to be addressed by the military since no MTF treatment was provided. A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated in February, 2006. Not having the opportunity to complete medical treatment or care, an MEB should consider all of his medical diagnoses, conditions and treatments.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05226
The complete NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit D. NGB/A1PF does not provide a recommendation but states that upon review of the applicants debt generated against his Aviator Continuation Pay agreement, they have concluded that, as it currently stands, the debt is valid. Additionally, the applicant has not provided supporting documentation to establish a basis to extend his MSD or show that he was treated in an unjust manner with respect to his promotion and repayment of ACP. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02765
The applicant reached his date of eligibility for sanctuary protection under AFI 36-2131 and Title 10 USC 12686; however, a MSD waiver package was not submitted or approved by the ANG; therefore, he was processed for transfer to the Retired Reserve IAW the governing directives and was not improperly and illegally removed from active duty and retired. First, his orders were in fact long-term (greater than 179 days) and that he was in fact eligible to apply for sanctuary protection under 10...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03145
He was told repeatedly during this time that all AGR, Title 10 members were put into “Returned To Duty” status since active duty couldn’t tell the ANG what to do with their people. In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement and copies of pertinent medical records, Congressional inquiries, retirement documents, and MEB and IPEB documentation. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01550
However, he and his MPF discovered that Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) guidance as outlined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, stipulates that in order to retire as a colonel he would have had to serve on AD status in the grade of colonel for at least three years in order to retire in the grade of colonel. 1370(a) wherein it is stated that officers who retire voluntarily “…must have served...
The applicant was progressively promoted to the Reserve of the Air Force and Air National Guard grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5), with a promotion service date (PSD) of 11 Jan 87 and an effective date of 15 May 87. By ANG Special Order AP-124, dated 5 Jun 98, he was promoted to the Reserve of the Air Force and Air National Guard grade of colonel (O-6), with a PSD and effective date of 30 Jun 96. In the applicant’s case, as a colonel (O-6), he could have served to age 60 or 30 years of...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00574
During the active duty continuation, he was paid BAH II instead of the BAH I that he was entitled to. During the time the AFBCMR continued him on active duty, he received BAH II at the with-dependent rate, Basic Allowance for Subsistence (BAS) and Aviator Career Incentive Pay (ACIP) from 1 October 2004 through 31 January 2006, less any offsets for civilian earnings during that time frame. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...