ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04092

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receives credit for four years and five months of satisfactory service to allow for retirement from the Air Force Reserve.

RESUME OF CASE:

By DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Record, dated, 14 Aug 13, the applicant requested to be allowed to transfer to the Retired Reserve or in the alternative receive credit for five years of satisfactory service to allow him to retire from the Air Force Reserve.  The applicant alleges he was not properly notified of his release from the Reserve.  He never received orders transferring him to the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS) in 1993.  He was not allowed to participate for pay or points due to his position as a federal judge.  He has served eight years of active service, eight years of reserve service and four years as a reservist and is eligible for a reserve retirement.  The Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) recommended the applicant’s request be denied.  The OPR noted the applicant did not meet the criteria for a reserve retirement.  He did not have the required years of service and age for retirement.  On 31 Jul 14, after thoroughly reviewing the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, the Board found his application untimely.  The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.  The applicant did not provide a plausible reason for the delay in filing.  Therefore, it was determined it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding his request, and the rationale for the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with exhibits (Exhibit F).

By virtue of a DD Form 149 dated, 30 Oct 15, the applicant requests reconsideration for four years and five months of satisfactory service credit to receive a reserve retirement.  He recently discovered a letter from the Staff Judge Advocate (SJA), Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center, dated 12 Aug 92, which indicated that after taking his oath of office he would be transferred to Category N, where he could continue to train for an additional five years in order to reach 20 years of service.  Furthermore, according to the Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 1200.7, para 2(b) (1) reserve officers with a remaining military service obligation at the time of removal from the Ready Reserve may be transferred only to the Standby Reserve, active Status.  He assumed he would be in Category N for five years and then be allowed to retire.  He relied on the information in the letter from the SJA.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

We note in an earlier finding the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  The applicant did not provide a plausible reason for the delay in filing.  Therefore, it was determined it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file and his application was denied.  After reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support of the appeal, we still find the application untimely.  While the applicant has provided the letter from the SJA noting that the applicant could continue to train after taking his oath of office, we found no evidence that shows he continued to train in order to qualify for retirement.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, we find the application untimely.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04092 in Executive Session on 26 Apr 16, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		, Panel Chair
		, Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04092 was considered:

	Exhibit F.  Record of Proceedings, dated 31 Jul 14,
  w/Exhibits.
Exhibit G.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 15, w/atchs.
1 2