Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00658
Original file (BC-2007-00658.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00658
                                             INDEX CODE:  135.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 August 2008


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record be corrected to reflect satisfactory service for retirement  year
ending (RYE)  11  November  1999  by  transferring  four Inactive  Duty  for
Training (IDT) points he  completed  during  RYE  11 November  1998  to  RYE
11 November 1999.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was new to the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA)  program  and  was
confused about his retention/retirement (R/R) year requirements.

He earned 4 IDT points in RYE 11 November 1998  under  the  assumption  that
this was required for meeting R/R participation  requirements.   These  IDTs
were completed at that time solely for in-processing  and  training  at  the
new unit to which he was assigned.  Had he  have  known  to  wait  until  he
entered his new R/R year before performing  IDTs,  this  error  would  never
have occurred.

In support of his appeal, he has submitted copies of his  DD  Form  214  and
his ANG/USAFR Point Credit Summary closing out 11 November 2006.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant initially entered  active  duty  on  12  November  1987.   He  was
released from active duty on 4 September 1998, and  was  assessed  into  the
USAFR as an IMA on 5 September 1998, with assignment/attachment to the  78th
Security Forces Squadron at Eglin AFB, FL.  His R/R year was established  as
12 November.  The R/R year is the 12 consecutive months in which an  ANG  or
USAFR member is required  to  accrue  a  minimum  of  50  points  (including
membership  points)  for  a  satisfactory  year  of  service   for   reserve
retirement purposes.

For the period 12 November 1997 through 11 November 1998,  he  was  credited
with 297 active duty (AD) points (active duty service from 12 November  1997
through 4 September 1998), four IDT  points,  three membership  points,  304
retirement points, and was credited with a  satisfactory  year  for  reserve
retirement purposes.

For RYE 11 November 1999, he was credited with 12 AD points, 20 IDT  points,
15 membership points, and 47 retirement points.  Since he earned  less  than
50 points for RYE 11 November 1999, he was not credited with a  satisfactory
year for reserve retirement purposes.

As of 11 November 2006, he has completed 17 years  of  satisfactory  service
for reserve retirement purposes.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPP  recommends  denial.   There  is  no  error  or  injustice  in  the
applicant’s records as points were  awarded  in  the  appropriate  R/R  year
based upon his participation dates.

If the relief sought is granted, they recommend  three  additional  non-paid
IDT points  be  awarded  for  RYE  11  November  1999,  which  would  change
applicant’s records to reflect 23 IDT points,  50 total  retirement  points,
and a year of satisfactory service for that year.

The ARPC/DPP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  23
March 2007, for review and comment, within 30 days.   However,  as  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

________________________________________________________________

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
points were awarded in the  appropriate  R/R  year  based  upon  the  actual
participation  dates.   Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to   the
contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief
sought in this application.

4.  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 issue(s) involved.  Therefore, the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

________________________________________________________________

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-2007-00658
in Executive Session on 3 May 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Maureen B. Higgins, Member
                       Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Feb 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 16 Mar 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Mar 07.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL, III
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03132

    Original file (BC-2007-03132.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    His record does not show unsatisfactory service (less than 50 points earned) until Retirement Year Ending (RYE) 18 January 2000. A correction was made, and his record now shows 91 AD points, 20 IDT points, 0 ECI points, 15 membership points, 126 total retirement points, and a year of satisfactory service for RYE 18 January 2002. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03272

    Original file (BC-2008-03272.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice as there is no evidence that he did not have sufficient opportunity during the 10 months after his assignment to the 37 th SFS to earn the additional 16 points he needed for a satisfactory year of service for RYE 9 January 2008. The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03370

    Original file (BC-2002-03370.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Points for participation can only be credited for the dates the inactive duty was performed. Correction to the advisory is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the evaluation and indicated that although the Reserve Order DA-01859 does assign him to the 514th AMW as an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) he was in fact hired as a full-time Air Reserve Technician (ART). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01372

    Original file (BC-2003-01372.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told when he became an individual mobilization augmentee (IMA) that his retention/retirement (R/R) date was 5 Dec and that he needed to earn 50 points between 5 Dec and 4 Dec to have a “good year.” At some point his records were audited and his R/R date was changed to 30 Jan, but he was never notified of the change. This recommendation will provide the applicant a satisfactory year of service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00869

    Original file (BC-2007-00869.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2007 | BC 2007 03460

    Original file (BC 2007 03460.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Four years is a sufficient amount of time for a member to discover the requirements necessary for successful completion in the IMA program and for obtaining a Reserve retirement year. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant finds the Air Force advisory opinion to be unsubstantiated. However, we note that he completed four years of satisfactory service towards retirement subsequent to his deployment and prior...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100283

    Original file (0100283.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 29 September 1986. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 March 2001 for review and response within 30 days. As a member of the Air Force Reserve since 1986 who received Point Credit Summaries following his successful completion of every R/R year, we believe he should have been familiar with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03439

    Original file (BC-2006-03439.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    A member’s Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) is established from their Total Federal Commissioned Service Date (TFCSD) in accordance with Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 14507, which requires that a Line-of- the Air Force colonel, not selected for promotion to the grade of brigadier general, be separated not later than the first day of the month following completion of 30-years commissioned service. Although applicant contends he had a break in service from November 1982 to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00705

    Original file (BC-2003-00705.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For RYE 29 Dec 93, the applicant did not earn any points from Sep 93 through Dec 93, then after two consecutive satisfactory federal service years, the applicant received another unsatisfactory year, and did not earn points from Sep 96 through Dec 96. According to Air Force Manual 36-8001, para 2.2, “points may only be credited to the date a member actually performed the duty.” The applicant was credited with points and in the proper retirement years. Based on the evidence of record and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00117

    Original file (BC-2007-00117.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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...