RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05035 ANTHONY B. CACHAPERO COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that on 31 Dec 06, he was released from active duty and retired, rather than discharged. He receive retroactive retirement pay, effective 31 Dec 06. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unjustly denied the opportunity to retire after serving more than 20 years. Non-judicial punishment (Article 15) was imposed upon him on 3 Dec 05, reducing him in rank. As a result, he was forced to separate because his reduction in grade caused him to reach his high-year tenure. At the time, he was told that his total time in service was less than 18 years; although, he fought to prove his correct time in service was around 20 years. After his mandatory separation, he joined the Army National Guard. Subsequently, his Article 15 was declared void and removed from his records; therefore, he should be granted retirement. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 Jan 01, as a prior service member. On 31 Dec 06, the applicant was furnished a honorable discharge under the provisions of AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen, for reduction in force, and was credited with 13 years, 7 months, 3 days of total active service. On 13 Nov 13, AFPC/DPSIPV provided the applicant a letter clarifying the computation and recording of his service dates. In addition, he was advised a computation error was discovered in the amount of inactive service recorded on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty. The inactive service was changed from 7 years, 1 month, and 7 days to 6 years, 7 months, and 28 days. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial. The applicant’s active duty service does not meet the 20 years required to qualify for retirement. The applicant was discharged 31 Dec 06, after completing 13 years, 7 months, and 3 days of total active federal military service (TAFMS). In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 08914, it is required that enlisted members serve at least 20 years of TAFMS to qualify for retirement. Specifically, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Air Force, an enlisted member of the Air Force who has at least 20, but less than 30, years of service computed under 10 U.S.C. § 8925, may upon his request, be retired. A representative from the AFPC Service Dates Verification office reviewed the applicant’s records and although he did have 20 years, 3 months, and 1 day of military service, it wasn’t all active duty military service. Military service identifies all components of active and inactive duty. Therefore, the applicant does not meet the criteria for an active duty retirement. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR 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 29 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). 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. 2.  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. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-05035 in Executive Session on 7 Oct 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member Due to the retirement of has agreed to sign as Panel Chair. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 13, w/atch. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 7 Aug 14. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Aug 14. 1 2