RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01243 (Case 2)
		INDEX CODE:  136.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His mandatory retirement date of 1 Nov 93 be changed to a voluntary retirement, with an effective date of 1 Jun 97.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at Exhibit A.

In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of his DD Forms 214 and 215, Special Order JB-000510, dated 7 May 97, a personal letter addressed to HQ AFPC/DPPR, a letter from the HQ ACC commander, with a copy of a revised PRF and an appeal to the Evaluation Report Appeal Board (ERAB), and additional documents associated with the issues cited in his contentions.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O5) on 31 October 1993 and retired under the provisions of AFR 35-7 (voluntary retirement for years of service established by law).  At the time of his retirement, he had completed a total of 20 years and 29 days of active service.  The effective date of his pay grade to O5 is 1 December 1989.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRRP recommends the application be denied.  DPPRRP stated that the applicant was given the opportunity to request reinstatement to active duty as a result of the retroactive promotion to lieutenant colonel, but he chose not to do so.  DPPRRP agrees an error did occur, but to grant the applicant the unearned service credit up to 1 June 1997 is not appropriate and would be unfair to all the other military members.  DPPRRP indicated that there are no provisions of law to grant credit for unserved active service.  The HQ AFPC/DPPRRP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that there was an offer to return to active duty; however, if he had taken this offer, he would have had a three and a half to four year gap in his official records.   In addition, he would have had a date of rank as a lieutenant colonel of 1 Dec 89 with numerous Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) as a major.  If the Air Force had done the right thing at the right time, he might have been given jobs that would have enhanced his potential for promotion to colonel, or at the very least, allowed him the choice to exit the Air Force on his own terms.  He is therefore asking that he be given some after-the-fact dignity and allow him to adjust his retirement date.  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 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.  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 appropriate 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 that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the above and absent evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number 02‑01243 in Executive Session on 19 June 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Apr 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 14 May 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 May 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter from applicant, dated 3 Jun 02, w/atchs.