ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2019-02773

xxxxxxxxxx	COUNSEL:  NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED:  YES
	
APPLICANT’S REQUEST

The Board reconsider her request to correct her military record to reflect:

1.	Satisfactory service in all years from 1982 to 1998, and complete a new DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and Point Summary Sheet with new codes.
2.	Promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) due to High Year of Tenure (HYT) in her last pay grade.

RESUME OF THE CASE

The applicant is an honorably discharged Air Force Reserve staff sergeant (E-5).  On 17 Mar 20, the Board considered and denied her request for correction of her military record to reflect satisfactory service from 1982 to 1998, a new DD Form 214 and Point Summary Sheet, and promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), finding the applicant had provided insufficient evidence of an error or injustice to justify relief.

For an accounting of the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.

On 10 Apr 20, the applicant requested reconsideration of her request via a rebuttal to the original advisories.  She again contended the documents provided with her original application, and provided again in her rebuttal response, are evidence that each and every unit meeting was attended and paid for, and retirement points awarded from 1988 until 1998-1999.  Thus, she completed 10 years “good time” in the USAF Reserve at Dobbins Air Force Base, Georgia.   She further contended the codes on the documents are in error and should reflect a “1” for satisfactory participation.  The fact that the documents were tracked by an individual and not automated is part of her issue.  The applicant contended she completed the requirements for retirement from the Reserve in 1993 point-wise, and was formally informed of this.   She stated the regulation stipulating retirement eligibility has changed but her record should be evaluated according to the rules in place during 1988-1998.  

Finally, the applicant contended the evaluation awarded 8 years service on her DD Form 214, which is correct for active duty time, but does not include the 11 years Reserve time, or the excessive number of training points awarded, which would give her 20 years of service. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The AFBCMR staff did not request an advisory opinion.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board remains unconvinced the evidence presented demonstrates an error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2019-02773 in Executive Session on 5 Jun 20 and 18 Jun 20:

, Panel Chair 
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit F:	Record of Proceedings, w/ Exhibits A-E, dated 15 Apr 20.
Exhibit G:	Applicant Response, w/atchs, dated 10 Apr 20.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.