RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05791
 					COUNSEL:  NONE
					HEARING DESIRED:  YES 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His transfer to the Air Force Reserve with a 3 year Individual 
Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) assignment be approved. 


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Reserves reneged on his transfer from the Air National Guard 
(ANG) after they had requested that he separate from the ANG to 
join their organization.  They should have honored the 3 year 
IMA assignment facilitated by their recruiter.  

The news that there was a problem with the transfer one day 
before the slated assignment start date was catastrophic.  Due 
to the Reserve recruiter’s mishandling of his transfer package 
his pay was going to stop.  He would not have a job and his 
accrued leave would be sold.

In May 11, he submitted an Inspector General (IG) complaint.  He 
received a response to the inquiry on 19 Aug 11 but by then it 
was too late.

Due to the stoppage of pay, leave and benefits and mounting 
bills, he had to retire on 30 Jun 11.  As such, he had no job, 
no time to plan his next career or plan a normal retirement.  He 
is still in shock and disbelief.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was a member of the Maryland ANG.

According to his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of 
Service, the applicant was transferred to the Air Force Reserve 
(ANG) Retired List on 30 Jun 11.  He was credited with 33 years, 
7 months and 1 day of total service for retired pay.  

According to an AF Form 1288, Application for Ready Reserve 
Assignment, dated 9 Dec 10, provided by the applicant, the 
Reserve recruiter recommended to RMG, Det 11 that he be approved 
for transfer to the Air Force Reserve and certified that he met 
eligibility requirement for assignment into the Air Force 
Reserve.  


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

RMG/CC recommends denial of the applicant’s request for 
accession into the Air Force Reserve as there is no 3 year 
assignment to honor. Per the Air Force Recruiting Information 
Support System-Reserve (AFRISS-R), the applicant was never hired 
into the Ready Reinforcement Personnel Section (RRPS (Category 
“E”) program.  The package was returned without action to the 
recruiter via the assignment technician on 11 Jan 11.   

Per AFI 36-2115, Assignments Within the Reserve Components, the 
RRPS is comprised of members who applied for Selected Reserve 
(SelRes) positions and found no vacancies or when other 
assignment options are not available or acceptable.  The 
applicant was assigned to the ANG and therefore did not fall 
under this category.  As for the pay issues, members in Category 
“E” receive points only and no pay per AFI 36-2115.  

A complete copy of the RMG/CC evaluation, with attachments, is 
at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

It is clear the recruiter administered all the requisite 
processes to recruit and manage the reserve accessions/service 
transfer program.  When he initially spoke to her on 30 Sep 10, 
she apprised him that the transfer process was pretty simple and 
would take 30 to 60 days to complete.  He performed all the 
tasks outlined in her correspondence for a successful service 
transfer.

Did the recruiter know the recruiting process for Category “E” 
positions?  If so, why did she not contact the Air Reserve 
Personnel Center (ARPC) to handle the matter.  He completed the 
AF Form 1288 dated on 9 Oct 10 which clearly states on page two 
the position number and the Category “E” designation.  
Additionally, the recruiter knew he was in the ANG and was 
transferring so why would she instruct him to fill out an Air 
Force Reserve Application, submit resumes, copies of his Officer 
Performance Reports (OPR), perform a new Physical Training (PT) 
test, a physical examination and obtain a separation from the 
ANG on 21 Dec 10.  

It is incorrect that there are no Category “E” positions on the 
Unit Manpower Document (UMD).  He has enclosed a copy of the Air 
Force District of Washington/A9 (AFDW/A9) UMD which shows the 
position number and other required information.

There was truly a contract assignment not honored.  An Air Force 
Reserve recruiter recruited him into a position that according 
to the RMG/CC was incorrect.  On 20 Dec 10, he was given one day 
notice that he could not be placed in a Category “E” slot.  His 
question in this nightmare is “what did he do wrong?”  He 
followed the recruiter’s instruction to the letter along with 
guidance provided by the AFDW/Reserve (RE) staff.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit E.    


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 an injustice.  We took notice of 
the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the 
case and do not find it supports a determination that the 
applicant should have been placed in an IMA position for 
3 years.  While the applicant’s assertions are duly noted, we do 
not find them sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale 
provided by the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility 
(OPR).  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force OPR and adopt the rationale expressed as the 
basis for our conclusion the applicant has failed to sustain his 
burden of proof that he has suffered an injustice.  Accordingly, 
in the absence of evidence showing the applicant was treated 
differently from others similarly situated, we find no 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 issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.





THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-05791 in Executive Session on 26 Feb 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Dec 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, RMG/CC, dated 20 Jun 14,w/atchs.
        Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Aug 14.
        Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Aug 14, w/atchs.