RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01510 INDEX CODE: 112.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her total active federal military service date (TAFMSD) be changed to reflect 21 Oct 87 rather than 16 Dec 87. If the above request is approved, her date of rank (DOR) to technical sergeant be recalculated and that she be given supplemental promotion consideration for senior master sergeant. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: There are errors in her master pay records, on her DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment Documents, AF Form 526, Reserve Point Summary, and her AF Form 1613, Statement of Service. The Air Force Reserve has not accounted for all her active duty time she served while in the Reserve. The Air Force Reserve uses the master pay record as a source document and she has proven there are errors on the master pay record and all supporting documentation used to calculate her original time in service (TIS) date of 9 Jan 88. The Air Force Reserve has made a correction to her TIS from 9 Jan 88 to 16 Dec 87, but that date is still incorrect. She has been attempting to correct the errors and it has taken until 8 May 07 for the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) to make adjustments and the date used is still incorrect. New information was discovered since the original error; however, the Air Force Reserve states they are unable to correct her records because of her master pay records. In support of her request, the applicant provided 30 attachments consisting of copies of emails, a letter from a previous supervisor, Reserve master pay record calendars for 1988 to 1991, copies of AF Forms 4/1, AF Forms 526, AF Forms 1613, AF Forms 1965, Earnings Statement Air Reserve Forces, Special Orders, copies of fax cover letters, and weighted airman promotion score (WAPS) notifications. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of master sergeant. On 30 Aug 07, HQ AFRC/A1, provided a response to a congressional inquiry stating that a review of the applicant’s information revealed that she already had received credit for her service performed and that her request to have her TAFMSD adjusted was disapproved (Exhibit E). Other relevant facts are outlined in the AFPC/DPSOE opinion at Exhibit B and the HQ AFRC/A1 response to a congressional inquiry at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. DPSOE states that the applicant was considered and non-selected for promotion to MSgt during cycle 00E7. Her total score was 329.24 and the score required for selection in her Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 329.74. Eligibles receive 1/6 of a point for each month of TAFMS. The applicant was considered for promotion to MSgt during cycle 02E7. Her total score was 343.16 and the score required for selection was 343.57. DPSOE states that HQ AFRC/A1 has determined that the applicant’s records reflect the correct points for the time she served in the Reserve and that since they recommend denial of her request, there is no promotion issue. The complete AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states she has tried going to the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) to correct her records since Apr 00. On 14 Feb 03, ARPC updated her AF Form 526, which changed her TAFMSD from 9 Jan 88 to 16 Dec 87. She states she advised ARPC this date was still incorrect. The applicant states she disagrees with the response provided by HQ AFRC/A1 to the congressional inquiry. If the dates were rescheduled unit training assemblies (UTA), then the AF Forms 1965 would reflect the rescheduled dates as UTAs. The Reserve would not pay and deposit funds into a bank account of any member until the actual duty is completed. The dates in question are active duty days which are not listed on her master pay records. She states she has already proven several errors with her master pay records. She was recalled and deployed for DESERT SHIELD/ STORM from 25 Jan 91 to 26 Apr 91. She states she worked two weekends a month due to the manning shortage of her Reserve unit for well over a year. One weekend was considered UTA – inactive duty time and the other weekend was active duty time. She was only required to work one weekend a month for the Reserve. Some of the dates in question are during the middle of the week. She could not have performed UTA duty during the middle of the week for her unit because active duty personnel utilized the facilities during the week. She states she started her annual tour on 10 Jun 91 and on 14 Jun 91, the base and her Reserve wing, were involved with Fiery Vigil. From 14 Jun 91 to 3 Jul 91, she states her unit worked 12 hour shifts to help with the evacuation of Clark AB, Philippines. ARPC and AFPC confirmed errors in her master pay records by changing her TAFMSD. The applicant states she is asking to have her TAFMSD corrected to 21 Oct 87 rather than 21 Oct 97 as indicated by AFPC/DPPPWM. The applicant states that 16 Dec 87 was not the TIS date used to credit her TIS points on the 97E6, 00E7, and 02E7 testing cycles. The TIS date used was 9 Jan 88. If the TIS date of 16 Dec 87 was used to calculate her original total score she would have a total score of 329.41. The e-mail from AFPC/DPPPWM proves previous test scores were not credited with the TIS change. She states that if the Board decides in her favor of a TAFMSD of 21 Oct 87, it would add another .34 to her total score which would be 329.75 (.01 above the score required for selection); her score for the 02E7 cycle would be 343.50 (.07 below score required for selection) The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibits D and F. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 her extensive submissions in support of her request, we were not persuaded that there was a miscalculation of her service credit. While she provided numerous official documents that she claimed supported her contention, AFRC/A1 indicates that, after a thorough review of her record her TAFMSD is correct. They also indicated that if she has evidence showing additional service credit, she should submit it to them for analysis and a decision on whether or not her TAFMSD should be recalculated. In this regard, we agree with the recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain the burden that she has suffered either an error or an injustice. 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 issues 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 Docket Number BC- 2007-01510 in Executive Session on 1 Apr 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-2007-01510: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 9 May 07. Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOE Memorandum, dated 16 Nov 07. Exhibit C. SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 25 Jan 08. Exhibit D. Applicant’s Rebuttal, w/atchs, dated 1 Feb 08 Exhibit E. HQ AFRC/A1 Memorandum to XXXXXXX, w/atch, dated 30 Aug 07 Exhibit F. Applicant’s Rebuttals, w/atchs, dated 30 Jan 08.