RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02794
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Pay Date be changed from 27 Dec 00 to 26 Jul 00.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The U.S. Coast Guard determined that his pay date was 26 Jul 00,
not 27 Dec 00.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to his DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document
Armed Forces of the United States, on 26 Jul 00, the applicant
enlisted in the U.S. Navy Reserves Delayed Entry/Enlistment
Program (DEP).
According to his DD Form 4/1, on 27 Dec 00, the applicant
enlisted in the Air National Guard (ANG) for a period of six
years in the grade of Airman Basic (AB, E-1).
According to Special Order AB-102, on 9 Jan 03, the applicant
was honorably discharged from the ANG and the Air Force Reserves
and on 10 Jan 03, he was transferred to the U.S. Navy Reserves.
He was credited with 2 years and 13 days of total service.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
DFAS-IN/JFEAA recommends denial. On 26 Jul 00, the applicant
entered the U.S. Navy Reserve for the purpose of delayed entry.
According to DoD 7000.14-R, Financial Management Regulation,
Volume 7A, Chapter 1, Subparagraph 2(a), For enlistments entered
into on or after 29 Nov 89 A period of enlisted service in a
Reserve Component under 10 U.S.C. 12103(b) or (d), including
inactive service under a DEP, is creditable service only if the
member performs inactive duty before beginning active duty or an
initial period of active duty for training. The applicant did
not report for duty but was delayed entry from 26 Jul 00 through
26 Dec 00; therefore, this period of time is non-creditable.
The complete DFAS 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 26 Jan 15 for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants 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 the
applicant has not 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-2014-02794 in Executive Session on 17 Mar 15, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Jul 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C. Letter, DFAS-IN/JFEAA, undated.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Jan 15.
3
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01815
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01815 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive payment for accrued annual leave at the time of his separation. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY1994 | BC 1994 02998
The AFBCMR issued AFBCMR Directive 94-02998 (Corrected Copy), dated 17 Jan 96, directing the two contested OPRs be declared void and removed from her records; her records be corrected to show she was not released from her AGR position on 12 Jul 91, but continued to serve until 11 May 94, at which point she would have attained 20 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS); on 12 May 94, she was released from her AGR tour and transferred to the Reserve; and, her corrected records...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-1994-02998
The AFBCMR issued AFBCMR Directive 94-02998 (Corrected Copy), dated 17 Jan 96, directing the two contested OPRs be declared void and removed from her records; her records be corrected to show she was not released from her AGR position on 12 Jul 91, but continued to serve until 11 May 94, at which point she would have attained 20 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS); on 12 May 94, she was released from her AGR tour and transferred to the Reserve; and, her corrected records...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00361
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He reported for duty and performed a weekend duty trip that was not reflected on his point summary. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Based on the evidence of record and that verified by HQ Air Force Reserve Command (HQ AFRC), it appears the applicant has received credit for all participation performed during the Retirement Year Ending (RYE) 17 Jan 01.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01154
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When she elected the RCSBP in 2000, she was informed she would only have to pay a premium for two years while her daughter was still under the age of 18. 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: DFAS-JBJE/CL recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00636
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00636 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated to the Air Force Reserve and placed on active duty for medical hold for referral to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). His physicians submission of two approved line of duty (LOD) determinations was evidence that he had two...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03355
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03355 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His current spouse be designated his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) beneficiary. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03970
On 22 Dec 82, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for financial irresponsibility and was reduced in grade from staff sergeant to sergeant. In their view, the Tower Amendment was not applicable to the applicant because he was reduced in grade prior to completion of 20 years of active service. In order for the applicant to have been eligible for retirement pay recalculation under the Tower Amendment, he would have needed 20 years of active service at the time he held the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02368
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02368 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receives Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP). Per ARPC/DPPR memorandum dated 20 Apr 04, the applicant completed the required years of service under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. § 1552 and Air Force Instruction, 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, to reflect that on 29 Jul 03,...
If this had been a good year, he would have been eligible for the RRL when he was considered for separation [in 90] and his case would have been reviewed as a retirement-in-lieu-of- discharge case. The applicant’s military personnel records, to include documents pertaining to the administrative discharge board and the AF/DRB appeals, are provided at Exhibit B. JACKSON A. HAUSLEIN, JR. Panel Chair AFBCMR 00-03240 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the...