RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00102
		INDEX CODE:  110.02
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be changed to show that he elected to separate under the Voluntary Separation Incentive program (VSI) rather than the Special Separation Benefit (SSB) program.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his separation he was told that if he elected VSI, instead of SSB, and wanted to continue to serve in the Reserve, he would be required to refund "dollar for dollar" the amount he received from VSI each year.  He has since learned that this is not the case.  If he would have been properly counseled, he would have elected VSI instead of SSB.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; and a copy of his SSB agreement.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 Jul 92, applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the Reserves under the SSB early release program after serving 10 years, 5 months, and 11 days on active duty.  he received a lump sum payment of $94,424.26.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRRP recommends denial.  DPPRRP states that officers who participated in the VSI/SSB program completed an AF Form 780 and signed an SSB agreement.  Criteria for the FY92-93 VSI/SSB Program was clearly outlined to all members electing to participate in these programs, to include information on members who could become retirement eligible upon completion of 8 years of Reserve service.  It would be inappropriate and unfair to other personnel who elected to receive the VSI/SSB to allow the applicant to change his election at this time.  The DPPRRP evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 are not persuaded by his uncorroborated assertions that prior to his election to separate early, he was miscounseled, that he was not made aware of the options available to him, or that the specifics of the early separation programs were not made available to him.  We agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend 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 AFBCNR Docket Number BC-2003-00102 in Executive Session on 3 Jun 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 19 Feb 03.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Feb 03.