RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00117
                                             INDEX CODE:  135.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  10 July 2008


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He  be  granted  non-pay,  Inactive  Duty  for  Training  (IDT)  points  for
Equivalent Reserve Instruction (ERI) and Community  Service  Programs  (CSP)
training that occurred between August 1983 and November 1996.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After each event, he  initially  submitted  the  AF  Form  40As,  Record  of
Individual Inactive  Duty  Training,  with  substantiating  material,  in  a
timely manner.  He erroneously sent the  forms  and  the  materials  to  the
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) instead of  the  Points  Management
Branch at the Air Reserve Personnel Center  (ARPC),  and  did  not  discover
this error until April 2001.  Upon discovering  the  error,  he  immediately
took action to reaccomplish/resubmit the paperwork to ARPC.

Although the IDT periods he  is  claiming  are  from  many  years  ago,  the
evidence he is submitting clearly substantiates the performance of the  duty
being claimed.

The  ERI  claims  he  is  submitting  involve  participation   at   academic
conferences.  Participation at these conferences dealt with topics that  are
clearly linked to his work in the military intelligence community.

As he understands it, ARPC is denying approval because the  claims  are  for
periods from so long ago.  The fact he has vivid  proof  of  each  submitted
claim of duty overrides the lapse of time.  AFM  36-8001,  dated  1  January
2000, was not in effect during the periods of duty  being  claimed,  and  he
followed the directives in place at the time the duty was performed.

In support of his appeal, he has  submitted  numerous  AF  Form  40As,  with
substantiating material.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently an Individual Mobilization Augmentee  (IMA)  assigned
duty as a Reserve Air Attache in the grade of colonel.  His  date  of  birth
is 3 August 1955 (age 51), and he has completed 22 satisfactory years for  a
reserve retirement as of 22 May 2006.  He is projected for  reassignment  to
the Retired Reserve effective 2 June 2007.

The publication of the current Air Force Manuel 36-8001 was  not  in  effect
at the time the duty was performed for the requested IDT  credit.   However,
AFM 36-8001 superseded AFR 35-41 in 2000, and the publication of  Air  Force
Regulation 35-41, Volume  2,  Reserve  Personnel  Policies  and  Procedures,
dates back  to  30 September  1975,  and  was  in  effect  during  the  time
applicant requests IDT points be awarded.

AFR 35-41, Volume II, governed how points could be earned, and how they  are
awarded and recorded.  It stated that activities for which IDT points  could
be earned are those that prepare a  reservist  for  mobilization  duties  or
support  an  active  Air  Force  mission.   All  IDT   must   have   written
authorization in advance, be done without remuneration from a United  States
Government source (other than for pay or points as a member of  the  USAFR),
be controlled or supervised by the proper military or  civilian  supervisor,
and require time and effort beyond that which  is  required  in  the  normal
course of a member’s civilian job.

Equivalent Reserve Instruction (ERI) was defined  as  instruction  a  member
got when attending a professional or trade  convention.   Requests  for  ERI
point eligibility were required to be sent to HQ USAF/REPP at least 30  days
before the proposed meeting(s).  Points could be earned if the  meeting  was
sponsored and supervised, and run by a military department, or  if  HQ  USAF
had determined that it would increase the member’s professional  development
or mobilization readiness, or do the same for the  qualifications  of  those
members he/she may supervise.  Additionally,  it  had  to  be  approved  for
point credit by HQ  USAF/REPP,  and  the  member  had  to  sign  in  with  a
designated monitor who  represented  the  military  (or,  if  there  was  no
monitor, he/she had been authorized by HQ USAF/REPP  to,  and  did,  certify
his/her own attendance).

Community Service Programs (CSP) were defined as projects to help the  local
community.  For point credit, they were  required  to  be  approved  by  the
installation commander, and had to benefit both the community  and  the  Air
Force.  The CSP was for members assigned to Category A,  Air  Force  Reserve
(AFR) unit assignments,  the  Air  National  Guard  (ANG),  and  members  of
reserve programs that supported Category A,  AFR  units,  the  ANG,  or  the
regular Air Force.  Other activities that  were  authorized  in  writing  in
advance by the commander, program manager, or appropriate staff officer  for
MAJCOM assigned Mobilization Assets (MAs) were also eligible for  CSP  point
credit.

Applicant’s Duty History reflects the following duty  titles  and  effective
dates during the periods for which the ERI and  CSP  IDT  points  are  being
requested:  21 November 1982  –  Intel  Officer,  2 February  1984  –  Intel
Applications Officer, 11 May 1989 – Signals Intel Officer, 29 December  1990
– Signals Intel Officer, 15 May 1991 – Signals  Intel  Officer,  10  October
1993 – Intelligence  Ops,  1  May  1994  –  Intel  Operations  Officer,  and
21 January 1998 – Foreign Area Attache.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPP recommends denial.  In May 2002, applicant requested  crediting  of
317 non-paid points for ERI and CSP IDT occurring  between  1976  and  2001.
His request was denied, and a detailed  response,  signed  by  ARPC/CV,  was
provided on 14 March  2003,  explaining  that  his  application  was  denied
because  of  improper  authorization/certification,  unauthorized  training,
ineligible status, and untimely filing.

In August 2006, he faxed them a request to approve some  of  the  same  non-
paid points, which was again denied  on  22  September  2006  for  the  same
reasons that were stated in their 14 March 2003 letter.

The ARPC/DPP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded to the  ARPC/DPP  advisory  on  20  February  2007.   He
reiterated his contention that he initially  submitted  the  AF  Form  40As,
Record of Individual Inactive Duty Training, with  substantiating  material,
in a timely manner, and that they were  erroneously  sent  to  the  National
Personnel Records Center (NPRC) instead of the Points Management  Branch  at
the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC).  Since discovering  the  error,  he
has been following the instructions conveyed  to  him  by  the  ARPC  Points
Management Branch, as well as the instructions posted on the  ARPC  website,
and directives in place at the time the duty was performed.  He has  in  his
possession AFM 36-8001, dated 1 January 2000; however,  practically  all  of
the points he is seeking are from periods prior to 1 January 2000, so he  is
working  from  directives  in  place  at  the  time  the  duty  claimed  was
performed.

His focus was on rebutting the explanation provided by the ARPC/CV 14  March
2003 letter, and referenced in the ARPC/DPP advisory for  this  application,
as to why his request was denied.  He provided his rationale as to  why  his
claims for participation at professional academic  conferences  between  May
1986  and  May  1988,  his  participation  at  professional  conferences  he
attended (and was a presenter at) between  May 1983 and  May 2001,  and  his
participation with CSP, should be honored  and  he  should  be  awarded  IDT
points.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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  since  the
non-pay IDT points he is requesting are for ERI and CSP  training  that  was
not properly unauthorized  in  advance,  was  not  properly  certified  upon
completion, and was not filed within 30 days after completion,  as  required
by the Air  Force  Regulation  in  effect  at  the  time  the  training  was
performed.  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  Docket  Number  BC-2007-00117
in Executive Session on 30 April 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                       Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 1 Feb 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Feb 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Feb 07.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair