RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00398 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect an additional two non-paid inactive duty points and six paid inactive duty training points and satisfactory service for retirement year ending (RYE) 5 September 1990. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In January 1990, he transferred from the Texas Air National Guard (TX ANG) to an individual mobilized augmentee (IMA) status as a result of becoming a solo urologist in a medically unserved area. Due to the need to provide full-time call availability to his patients, he found he had significant difficulty meeting his IMA requirements and decided to request discharge in June-July 1990. His conversations in January and June 1990 lasted well over four hours on both occasions and one point of non-paid inactive duty training was requested. He believes he served two consecutive days at the XX AFB USAF Hospital in April, May, and June 1990, instead of the one day of training credited. He does not remember receiving a copy of his AF Form 526, ANG/USAFR Point Credit Summary, after it was generated in 1990. On 13 July 2009, he requested copies of his Leave and Earnings Statements (LES) from July 1989 through October 1990; however, they were not received until mid-December 2009. There was no way for him to discover the error between his separation in 1990 and his return to the Air Force in February 2008. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of a letter from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), with attachments; LES, facsimile, dated 13 July 2009; and an AF Form 526. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant tendered his resignation and was discharged from the TX ANG on 12 October 1990. He returned to the Air Force Reserve on 25 February 2008 and is presently serving in the grade of colonel. Other relevant facts are outlined in the HQ ARPC/DPP evaluation which is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPP recommends denial. DPP states the applicant’s active duty Regular and Reserve service history was re-audited in accordance with Air Force Manual 36-8001, Reserve Personnel Participation and Training Procedures, Table 2.4. During the period prior to his civilian break, the start date of his retirement year was established as 2 June. The re-audit caused a realignment of participation dates and points within the retention/retirement (R/R) year for the period he was in the TX ANG, eliminating the unsatisfactory year of service. The re-audit also resulted in an increase of eight months and 26 days of satisfactory service, without any unsatisfactory years. The civilian break re-establishes the R/R date as 25 February. Further, the pay records do not substantiate the claim for the second day of the unit training activities (UTAs). The pay record and point summary shows the applicant received pay and two points each for 6 April and 1 June 1990. The point credit summary shows he received two non-paid points for 12 May 1990. The applicant resigned stating he was unable to meet the training goals. Therefore, he was tracking his requirements. He is requesting inactive duty training points based on his memory of events ten years ago. The pay records do not support his claims. Normally, UTAs are submitted together on the same form. The pay office does not usually process one UTA day and not the second. Documentation does not exist for the non-paid inactive duty. Since the service history was re-audited, the unsatisfactory retirement year in question no longer exists. The complete HQ ARPC/DPP 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 24 March 2010 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has not received a 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 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 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. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 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-2010-00398 in Executive Session on 17 June 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-2010-00398: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jan 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, HQ ARPC/DPP, dated 15 Mar 10, w/atchs. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Mar 10.