RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-03522

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be credited with 10 months of active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) reflects that he accrued 10 months of active duty which was not reflected on his NGB Form 22.  He states that this appears to leave him with enough time for retirement.  If the error is rectified, he should be granted retroactive benefits back to age 60 and forward until his death.

Applicant states that during the intervening years he sought to obtain congressional help in clarifying the data but was unaware that the information was omitted on the NGB Form 22.

In support of the applicant’s appeal, he provided a copy of his DD Form 214 and NGB Form 22.

His complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

ARPC Form 168, Computation for AF Form 526, dated 23 January 2002, reflects that the applicant served in the U.S. Navy Reserve from 4 August 1953 to 30 September 1965.  He was in civilian status from 1 October 1965 to 25 June 1976.  He served in the Air National Guard from 26 June 1976 until his discharge on 26 July 1985 due to medical disqualification.  He was transferred to the Honorary Retired Reserve on 26 July 1985.  The applicant completed a total of 19 years, 1 month, and 27 days of satisfactory Federal service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPP recommended denial.  They state that the applicant’s records reveal that he was, in fact, properly credited with all of his service.  They indicate that in order for him to qualify for retirement benefits, he must complete 20 years of satisfactory federal service, with the last eight years in a reserve component, as required by US Code, Title 10, Section 12731.  They further state that the applicant does meet the age requirement; however, he does not meet the service requirements to receive retired pay.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 10 March 2002, the applicant submitted additional documents to further substantiate his claim.  He provided a transcript to reflect his attendance at the University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) from September 1967 until 28 August 1968, as a recipient of a Federal traineeship and a Report of Individual Personnel (RIP), dated 3 July 1985, just prior to his discharge from the Air National Guard.

Applicant’s complete response 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 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 error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that his assertions, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  Based on the evidence of record and that verified by HQ Air Reserve Personnel Center (HQ ARPC), the applicant was properly credited for all of the service which he performed during his career, including the credit of 304 points (which equates to 10 months) of active duty he received for Retirement Year Ending (RYE) 3 August 1962.  Therefore, 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 decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or injustice.  There being insufficient 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 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 this application AFBCMR Docket Number 01-03522 in Executive Session on 29 May 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Dec 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPP, dated 7 Feb 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Feb 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 10 Mar 02, w/atchs.