RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00274
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be retired in the grade of Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col, O-5).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His retired rank was unjustly excluded for a Time-in-Grade (TIG)
waiver. He had over 25 months TIG at the time of his retirement.
There is an 8 month gap between the effective dates of the Fiscal
Year (FY12) through FY14 waiver programs. The conditions
requiring these programs were the same before, during and after
these periods. He should be permitted to retain his grade of Lt
Col in retirement for fulfilling the same requirements as officers
who retired 3 months before and 5 months after him.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge
from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 1 Dec
12 retirement, reflects that he was promoted to the grade of
lieutenant colonel effective 1 Nov 10.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. There is no evidence of error in
his record or evidence that he was treated in a manner different
from his contemporaries. It would not be fair to allow him to
retire in the grade of Lt Col when others in similar situations
were not.
The applicant submitted a request for a TIG waiver which was
returned without action on 14 Feb 12. The SAFPC declined to
review the case since TIG waivers were available to the Service
Secretaries and were being offered through the established force
management program. A review of his record indicates he was
briefed on this information and signed a statement electing to
retire in the grade of Major (Maj, O-4).
For the past several years, the Secretary of the Air Force
authorized the use of force shaping/management programs to offer
waivers to separation or retirement restrictions to certain
eligible members to meet Congressionally-mandated end strength.
Prior to the submission of his retirement application, the
FY12 Expanded Officer Voluntary Force Management Program was
announced. PSDM 11-05 dated 6 Dec 11 outlined programs available
to officers in certain competitive categories or specialties. The
TIG waiver program allowed certain Lt Cols to request retirement
with no less than 2 years TIG and be retired in the grade of Lt
Col; however, under the FY12 program parameters, the retirement
must have been effective no later than 1 Sep 12.
The FY13 Force Management program was not announced until 1 Feb
13 through PSDM 13-09. In the FY13 program, the TIG waiver
program was also offered to eligible officers, however,
retirements had to be effective no earlier than 1 May 13 and no
later than 1 Sep 13.
The applicant was briefed on the TIG requirement and voluntarily
elected to retire in the grade of Maj. He could have elected to
delay his retirement which would have allowed him to request a TIG
waiver under the parameters of the FY13 program, or complete the
required TIG; however, he made the choice to retire effective
1 Dec 12 in the grade of Maj.
A complete copy of the DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 15 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).
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 the
rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant
has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the
victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting
the relief sought in this application.
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-2014-00274 in Executive Session on 20 Jan 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 Jan 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 26 Apr 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 May 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03463
He was notified the control roster action automatically placed him on the FY13 Rollback Program. He contacted the Separations office at Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) Randolph to correct this issue, but they were unable to manually change separation code on DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, because the automatic LGH separation code was loaded in their system. On 15 Jul 13, the applicant was separated under the FY13 DOS Rollback Program, with a RE code of 2X;...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00360
The Personnel Services Delivery Memorandum (PSDM) 13-14, FY13 Enlisted Date of Separation (DOS) Rollback Program, dated 13 Feb 13 states that members with less than 6 years of active service separated under the DOS Rollback program will be separated with SPD code JBK. Her AF IMT 100, Request and Authorization for Separation, Item 23, Remarks, reads SPD code JBK. The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. If any recoupment of unearned portions of...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-03569
The applicant had less than 2 years TIG on her requested retirement date of 1 Aug 01 and did not qualify for the waiver to retire with two years TIG. If a waiver to the 3-year TIG requirement had existed on 1 Feb 03, her retired pay would still be the same. There is no difference in benefits accorded to her if retired in the grade of major or retired in the grade of Lt Col. HQ AFPC/DPPRRP’s evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04061
However, he reentered the Reserve in Jun 02, was promoted to the grade of Lt Col in Sep 04, and retired a second time in Feb 07 in the grade of Maj. Again, he reentered active duty in Jul 10 in the grade of Lt Col, this time under the Retired Rated Officer Recall Program (RRORP), and served through Apr 13. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 1 Aug 99, the applicant retired from the Regular Air Force in grade of Maj. On 26 Jun 02, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02143
On 31 Aug 11, he retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel, having served in the grade of colonel for two years and eight months as a full colonel. The applicant contends that an OPR for the period 16 Jan 97 thru 26 Jun 97 should have been accomplished and were it not for its omission from is officer selection record (OSR), he would have been promoted BPZ. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03183
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his application because he feels it is unfair that his dependents be punished for an error made by not being educated on the process of allocating one month to each dependent. Airmen who wish to retain their transfer benefit may reference Attachment 3, Enlisted Palace Chase Program, for continued service in the Guard or Reserve. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012878
Based on the foregoing, it would be in the interest of equity to grant the applicant a military educational waiver for the FY05 through FY12 LTC boards and send his records to an SSB for promotion consideration to LTC under the FY05 through FY12 promotion criteria. If he is selected for promotion to LTC, it would be appropriate to grant a military educational waiver for the applicable COL board and send his records to an SSB for promotion consideration under the applicable COL criteria. As...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04276
It is the date officers selected for continuation would have been continued. The selective continuation process is not a force shaping board, but a product of nonselection for the second time that can result in separation from the Air Force. Counsel argues that the governing DoDI 1320.08 provision requires that officers within 6 years of retirement be offered continuation unless they have derogatory information in their record, which the applicant did not.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04272
It is the date that officers selected for continuation would have been continued. The selective continuation process is not a force shaping board, but a product of nonselection for the second time that can result in separation from the Air Force. Counsel argues that the governing DoDI 1320.08 provision requires that officers within 6 years of retirement be offered continuation unless they have derogatory information in their record, which the applicant did not.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04271
It is the date that officers selected for continuation would have been continued. The selective continuation process is not a force shaping board, but a product of nonselection for the second time that can result in separation from the Air Force. Counsel argues that the governing DoDI 1320.08 provision requires that officers within 6 years of retirement be offered continuation unless they have derogatory information in their record, which the applicant did not.