RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00068 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive separation pay for his 14 years of service. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His separation was due to High year Tenure (HYT); however, he never received separation pay. He was not allowed to test, cross-train, or reenlist. He was told by his Operations Superintendent that his only option was to separate and nothing could be done for him to stay in the service. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his AF Form 366, Record of Proceedings of Vacation of Suspended Nonjudicial Punishment; a date of rank (DOR) adjustment worksheet; a Statement of Service; excerpts from the DoD Financial Management Regulation; and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was separated from the Air Force on 10 July 2007 under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-3208, paragraph 3.15, for miscellaneous/general reasons, with an honorable characterization of service. He served 7 years, 11 months, and 1 day on his current term of active duty with 6 years and 6 months of prior active service. According to the limited available service records, the applicant received Article 15 punishment for utilizing his government travel card for unofficial purposes. His punishment consisted of reduction in grade to senior airman (SrA), forfeiture of $200 pay per month for two months, restriction to the base for 35 days, 35 days extra duty, and a reprimand. That portion of his punishment concerning reduction in grade was suspended through 25 April 2007; however, was vacated on 5 December 2006 for violating one or more conditions of the suspension. He was subsequently reduced to the grade of SrA with a new DOR of 26 October 2006. As a result of the demotion action, the applicant’s high year of tenure (HYT) date was established as 7 December 2007. His date of separation (DOS) was 2 January 2008. After being approved for a voluntary separation, the applicant was honorably discharged effective 10 July 2007 for miscellaneous/general reasons. He served a total of 14 years, 5 months, and 1 day on active duty. According to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service, he received a final separation payment of $407 for pay and allowances, and 2.5 days lump sum leave. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOS recommends denying the applicant’s request. DPSOS indicates that individuals who request voluntary separation are normally not entitled to separation pay. In order for the applicant to have been eligible for separation pay, he must have separated in his HYT month, or requested to separate prior to his HYT month after release of the staff sergeant promotion list (August 2007) for which he was time-in-grade eligible. This provision applies whether the applicant was eligible or ineligible to test for other reasons other than being time-in- grade eligible. Since the applicant requested early separation prior to the release of the promotion list, he was ineligible for separation pay. DPSOS states the applicant did not submit any evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation. The complete DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit B. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he would have stayed in the Air Force and finished a 20-year career if he could have; however, he was never given the opportunity to test for the 2007 cycle for promotion to staff sergeant. He was advised by his commander and Operations Superintendent that it was in his best interest to start making plans for a life outside of the Air Force. Therefore, he found a job that had an opening date in August 2007. He talked to the personnel in the separations unit about an early-out and if it would affect his separation pay; however, he was told that it would not, because he was unable to test for promotion, he could not cross-train, and he had no options to have a career in the Air Force. He was told that all he needed to do was to get his commander’s approval for an early separation. His commander saw no opportunities for him to remain in the Air Force and indicated he would receive separation pay. He does admit that he voluntarily asked to leave the Air Force, but this was under the advisement of his commander and the personnel in the military separations office. The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, in the absence of evidence confirming miscounselling by the Operations Superintendent or his commander, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their 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 compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ 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 this application in Executive Session on 15 October 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2009-00068 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Jan 09, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 7 Jul 09. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jul 09. Exhibit D. Applicant's Rebuttal, undated. Panel Chair