RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02586

XXXXXXXXXX					COUNSEL:  NONE
	
							HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive special duty pay for the period 31 October 2002 to 2 October 2006.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He did not receive special duty pay while he was assigned as an Air Traffic Control instructor.  Air Traffic Control instructors are entitled to $225.00 a month and he was told that this stipend was for “watch supervisor pay,” which he was not entitled to because of his rank.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 17 December 1997.

According to the applicant’s AF Form 2096, Classification On-the-Job Training Action, dated 28 October 2002, his proficiency pay in the amount of $165.00 was withdrawn effective 2 October 2002, because he was no longer performing duties in Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 1C151 (Air Traffic Control).  He departed his last duty station on 1 October 2002 and his new duty AFSC (DAFSC) was T1C151 (Air Traffic Control Formal Training Instructor).

According to Special Order P-177 dated 1 January 2003, the applicant was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5, SSgt) effective 1 January 2003.

The applicant’s Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) for the period 17 August 2002 through 16 August 2006, indicate his DAFSC as T1C151 and his duty title was Instructor Air Traffic Control.

According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, on 1 January 2007, he received an honorable discharge, and was credited with 9 years and 15 days of active service.  His primary specialty was Formal Training Instructor, Air Traffic Control Craftsman, 8 years and 10 months.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  AFI 36-3017, Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP) Program, states that Air Traffic Controllers in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), hold SEI 054 or 055, or 362, and are certified as Watch Supervisor (1C171, 1C191, 1C100) may be eligible to receive SDAP.  These requirements apply to the Primary and Duty AFSCs.  In addition, unit commanders are responsible for identifying members who are qualified and eligible by submitting AF Form 2096 or special orders for actions affecting an airman’s SDAP.  Based on a review of the applicant’s record and evidence provided AFPC/DPSIM is unable to determine if the applicant met all qualifications without verification from his commanding officer.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 October 2015, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note 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 Correction of military records: claims incident thereto, and AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years prior to receipt of the application, we believe a reasonable date of discovery was more than three years prior to receipt of the application.  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-2015-02586 in Executive Session on 14 June 2016 and 17 October 2016, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02586 was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 June 2016, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 20 August 2015.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 October 2015.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.