RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01023
		INDEX CODE:  135.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His total satisfactory years of service be corrected to reflect that he has over 20 years of satisfactory service towards a Reserve retirement.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Navy DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, was destroyed in the St Louis Records Warehouse fire.  He submitted alternate documentation to the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) to verify his creditable service and ARPC did not accept the alternate documentation as verification of his creditable service.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of an Air Force form DD 214, corrections to said DD Form 214, several enlistment/reenlistment documents, and copies of an earlier application to change his record that was returned without action by HQ ARPC/DPP.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the US Navy Reserve (USNR) on 19 March 1969 for a period of six years.  On 23 June 1969, he joined the Regular Navy (USN) for a period of two years.  On 1 September 1971, he was honorably discharged from the USN and transferred to the USNR where he served until 16 May 1973.  On 17 May 1973, he joined the Air Force Reserve (AFR) and served until he was honorably discharged on 16 May 1976.  According to DD Form 1966, Record of Military Processing-Armed Forces of the United States, he had a break in service from 17 May 1976 until he rejoined the USNR on 28 September 1990.  He served with the USNR until 27 August 1997.  On 28 August 1997 he joined the Michigan Air National Guard (MIANG) and continues to serve with them today.  After recent corrections to his DD Form 214, his service has been calculated and results in 19 years, 0 months, and 0 days of satisfactory service as of 27 September 2004.  He is currently serving with the MIANG in the grade of master sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPP recommends denial.  DPP states they were able to obtain the applicant’s USN and USNR prior service documentation, originally thought to have been destroyed by fire.  After a subsequent audit of his service history, DPP could find no discrepancies.  The applicant has not provided any further documentation showing prior service time that has not been counted.  Therefore, DPP’s calculation of 19 years of satisfactory service as of 27 September 2004 is considered accurate. 

DPP’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 25 March 2005 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 to include his contention that his prior Navy and Naval Reserve service were not been credited towards his satisfactory years of service.  In this respect, we note the prior service records previously thought to have been destroyed were found and the applicant's service records were corrected to reflect the prior Navy and Naval Reserve service.  An audit of the applicant's service history was reaccomplished and no discrepancies were found. Therefore, 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 that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-01023 in Executive Session on 26 April 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Mar 04, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 21 Mar 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.