RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02785
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive a reduced retirement of an additional 180 days toreduce his retirement age.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was only credited with two 90-day reserve retirement
reductions. He performed 405 qualifying days. He feels it is
unjust to perform the same amount of duty as another airman andonly receive 180 days credit, while others receive 360 dayscredit by manipulating the days.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a summary ofqualifying Title 10 orders.
The applicants complete submission, with attachment, is atExhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Air Force Reserves. He
was transferred to the Retired Reserves on 1 June 2011 in the
grade of colonel.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application arecontained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office ofthe Air Force which is located at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPPT recommends denial. The applicant is requesting thathis cumulative total qualifying active duty, served to reducehis Reserve retired pay age, be used to calculate his reducedretired pay age without the fiscal year (FY) restriction.
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY2008 amendedTitle 10, U.S.C. Section 12731 to allow members to reduce theirretired pay age of 60 by 3 months for each aggregate of 90 days
of qualifying active duty service fiscal year. Qualifyingactive duty service includes a call or order to active dutyserved after 2008, for the purpose of responding to a nationalemergency declared by the President or supported by federalfunds.
A review of the applicants record shows he turns 60 on 14 March2019 and would normally be entitled to draw Reserve retired payon that date. However, his record shows that he has qualifyingactive duty to reduce his retired pay age since he served on
qualifying active duty.
The applicant did not have an aggregate of 90 days of qualifyingservice in FY2008. He has two qualifying 90 day periods, one inFY2010 and one in FY2011 for a total of 6 months to be
subtracted from the date of his 60th birthday. His early retiredpay date is 14 September 2018. The applicant thinks his
qualifying active duty days should be combined rather thanseparating them by fiscal year giving him a reduced retired payage of 14 March 2018.
The complete DPPT evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 30 August 2012, for review and comment within30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received
no response.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided byexisting law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The
applicant's submission was thoroughly reviewed and his
contentions were duly noted. However, evidence has not beenpresented which would lead us to believe that he is entitled tothe relief he seeks. Therefore, we agree with the opinion andrecommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibilityand adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion and find
2
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error orinjustice. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we findno basis upon which to favorably consider this application.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did notdemonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; thatthe application was denied without a personal appearance; andthat the application will only be reconsidered upon the
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not consideredwith this application.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR DocketNumber BC-2012-02785 in Executive Session on 23 January 2013,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 26 Jun 12, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPPT, dated 15 Aug 12, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 12.
Panel Chair
3
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00339
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00339 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: All of his Special Orders covering the period Jun 08 through Sep 10 be changed so Block 1 Authority reflects Title 32 United States Code (USC) §502(f)(2), instead of Title 32 USC §504/505. The applicant has not provided sufficient documentation to establish that the orders he is requesting be changed were issued...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02189
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPPT recommends denial, stating, in part, based on the facts provided, the applicant made an irrevocable RCSBP election for Option B, "Deferred Annuity for Child Only" as prescribed by law U.S.C. In accordance with Title 10, U.S.C., Section 1448 the RCSBP election is irrevocable if not revoked before the end of the 90- day period unless there is a life changing event. As of this date, no response...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003761
Therefore, his qualifying active service from November 2008 through August 2009 results in his being eligible for retired pay effective 2 April 2012. National Guard Regulation 680-2 (Automated Retirement Points Accounting Management), dated 19 August 2011, prescribes procedures to establish and maintain retirement records, establish the anniversary year, determine service requirements to qualify for retirement for non-regular service, prepare and issue notifications of eligibility for...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04222
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04222 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be eligible for Reserve retired pay on 10 Nov 10, nine months prior to his 60th birthday on 10 Aug 11. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was only six days short of performing the required...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05917
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: In a letter to the applicant dated 13 Feb 2013, ARPC/DPTT invited the applicant to provide additional documentation showing that he satisfactorily held the grade of SSgt. DPPT states that a review of all available military records show the highest grade held by the applicant was that of senior airman (SrA, E-4). We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003309
The applicant requests correction of the effective date of his retirement to show 31 October 2009. He states he served in Iraq from 1 December 2007 through 12 December 2009 and calculating from the effective date of the law, 28 January 2008, this is a total of 319 days of which he believed he would be credited with 270 days. The policy memoranda stated for each aggregate of 90 qualifying days in an FY, a Soldier is eligible for reduction of 3 months in age of eligibility for retired pay...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00640
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00640 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to show that he elected Option C (Immediate Annuity), under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP), for spouse and child coverage, based on full retired pay. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00656
On 27 May 07, the applicant and service member were married. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the ARPC/DPPT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: They...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01538
He married the mother of his children two years after he made his beneficiary election but he did not enroll her in RCSBP at the time. The RCSBP information package sent to the applicant in February 2007 stated any life changing events must be reported to their office within one year of the event. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02018
If the Board determines otherwise, he is able to provide whatever evidence is deemed necessary. The applicant did not provide any documents in support of his request. In this respect, the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) has indicated that through no fault of the applicant it appears he may not have been afforded the opportunity to transfer his benefits to his dependents.