Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9700154
Original file (9700154.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
c 

Y 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-01154 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

'm 14'898 

APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: 
His military service be extended so he may use terminal leave and 
receive medical treatment for 12 months. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
He went  temporary duty  (TDY) from July  1996  to October  1996  to 
In November and December 1996  he was taking a series 
of shots to the spine for a herniated disc and had rotator cuff 
surgery  on  20  November  1996. 
Because  of  all  the  medical 
treatment  he  received, he  was  unable  to  prepare  for  a  smooth 
transition  from  the  military.  When  he  initially  applied  for 
retirement,  his  medical  problems  weren't  identified  which 
prevented  him  from  making  a  smooth move  into  the  job  market. 
Applicant  states  that  he  requested  an  extension  at  the  local 
level, but  was  only granted  four  (4) months.  His  surgery for 
rotator cuff repair convalescent leave, and also taking a series 
of  shots  for  herniated  disc  during  the  November-December  1996 
time frame prevented him from preparing for retirement during his 
scheduled date. 
Applicant's submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

During the time period in question, applicant was serving in the 
Regular Air Force in the grade of master  sergeant  (E-7).  Based 
on his initial enlistment on 11 March 1974, he had an established 
high year of  tenure  (HYT) date of March 1998.  Master Sergeants 
have HYTs of 24 years. 
Applicant  applied  for  retirement  on  12  April  1996  and  his 
application was approved to become effective 1 April 1997. 
On 31 March 1997, he requested an extension of his retirement for 
12  months  due  to  medical  reasons.  Applicant's request  for  an 
extension was  approved  for three months  and  his  new  retirement 

date was to be  effective 1 July 1997.  At  that  time, applicant 
indicated . . . IrI have 87 days before beginning terminal leave and 
I  am  eligible  for  20  days  house  hunting  and  5  days  out 
processing.Il  The Retirements Operations Section, HQ AFPC/DPPRSO 
indicates that applicant requested a subsequent extension of his 
retirement on 7  April 1997 and the request was approved with his 
new  retirement date  to be  effective  1 August  1997,  by  Special 
Order Number AC-009106, dated 10 April 1997. 
Applicant  was  released  from  active  duty  on  31  July  1997  and 
retired effective 1 August  1997 under the provisions of AFI  36- 
3203  (Voluntary-Retirement for  Years  of  Service Established by 
Law) in the grade of master sergeant. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

~ 

The Chief, Special Activities, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, states that since 
the applicant entered the Regular- Air 
Force on 11 March 1974, his 
HYT  is  established  as  March  1998. 
He  may  extend  his  date  of 
separation  (DOS) to April  1998 , which 
is one month following his 
established HYT. 
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is 

attached at Exhibit C. 

The Retirements Operations Section, HQ AFPC/DPPRSO, states that 
AFI  36-3203 provides for extension of  an approved retirement by 
reason of  hardship uncommon to a member's contemporaries or for 
the  best  interest of  the Air  Force.  However, members  may  not 
request withdrawal or extension  [of a retirement date] to stay on 
active  duty  solely  to  resolve  a  medical  problem  or  receive 
medical treatment.  If the applicant's medical conditions are of 
such a  nature  that  he  is found unfit  for duty, he  should have 
been  placed  on  medical  hold  which  would  have  delayed  his 
retirement.  The  applicant  voluntarily  requested  a  retirement 
date much  earlier than his established HYT  date, signifying his 
intentions to retire sooner than necessary. 
Applicant  provided  no  documentation  to  justify  a  12-month 
extension of his retirement date of  1 August 1997, based on best 
interest  of  the  Air  Force  or  for  hardship  uncommon  to  his 
contemporaries.  He could have used ordinary leave to prevent its 
loss  prior  to  his  out  processing  for  retirement.  Leave  and 
permissive TDY are not entitlements.  Rather, they are available 
at the commander's option so long as mission requirements allow. 
As a matter of additional information, following the applicant's 
request  for  the  1  August  1997  extension  of  his  approved 
retirement, he  never  requested  an  additional  extension  through 
AFPC/DPPRSO.  The BCMR  request, submitted while  he was still on 
active  duty,  was  the  first  notice  that  he  had  additional 
requests.  All Air Force channels must be applied through before 

2 

They recommend the 

applicant can claim an "error or injustice. 
applicant's request be denied. 
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is 
attached at Exhibit D. 
The Chief, Medical Standards Branch, HQ AFPC/DPAMM, states that a 
review  of  medical  records  does  not  disclose  any  evidence  to 
support  correction of  records.  The  applicant  had  surgery  on 
20 November 1996 and was placed on a medical profile.  He started 
rehabilitation  in  January  1997.  Medical  Hold  for  long  term 
Physical  Therapy  was  disapproved  by  the .  physicians  at 
Headquarters  AFPC/DPAMM,  Medical  Standards  Branch  as  the 
applicant did not overcome the presumption of  fitness for duty. 
Also, AFI  48-123  states Medical  Hold  is not  approved  for long 
term  convalescence  and/or  rehabilitation.  They  recommend  the 
applicant's request be denied. 
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant  submitted a rebuttal to the Air Force evaluations and 
states, in part, that after his surgery, he was placed on profile 
during  his  recovery  period  and  returned  fit  for  duty  shortly 
thereafter.  He was placed on medical hold by the surgeon so that 
he  could reevaluate multiple conditions for which the applicant 
was being treated.  The recommendation for medical hold was not 
forwarded  to  the  Medical  Standards  Branch  for  approval  until 
27 March  1997.  Applicant  states he  did  everything  within  his 
power to extend his date of separation to April 1998.  He was fit 
for  duty  and  this  extension would  allow  time  for his  medical 
he had 
evaluation. 
to continue to see the doctors after his retirement.  Applicant 
states that he lost 21 days of leave and other benefits like 20 
days house hunting. 
A  copy of the applicant's response, with attachments, 
at Exhibit G. 

Because he was denied the one-year extension, 

is attached 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 

1. 
law or regulations. 
2 .   The application was timely filed. 
3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After 
a  thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record  and  applicant's 

3 

submission, we are not persuaded that his retirement date should 
be  extended for 12 months so that he may use  leave and receive 
medical treatment.  His contentions are duly noted; however, we 
do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently 
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the off ices or 
the  Air  Force.  We  note  that  at  the  time  applicant  made  his 
requests  for  an  extension  of  his  retirement  date,  so  that  he 
could  receive  medical  treatment,  he  was  receiving  physical 
therapy; however, he was considered qualified for worldwide duty 
and  was  continuing  to  perform  his  duties.  As  stated  by  HQ 
AFPC/DPPRSO,  AFI  36-3203  provides  for  extension  of  approved 
to  a  member's 
retirement  by  reason  of  hardship  uncommon 
contemporaries or for the best  interest of the Air Force.  The 
AFI  also  states  that  members  may  not  request  withdrawal  or 
extension  to  stay  on  active  duty  solely  to  resolve  a  medical 
problem or receive medical treatment.  Information obtained from 
the Air Force Personnel Center, indicates that the applicant did 
receive  20  days of permissive TDY and also used  terminal leave 
prior  to  his  retirement.  It  appears that  the  applicant  could 
have used his accrued leave subsequent to his surgery in November 
1996.  We  therefore agree with  the  recommendations of  the Air 
Force  and  adopt  the  rationale  expressed  as  the  basis  for our 
decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that 
he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we 
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 

* 

4.  The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to 
give the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a 
personal  appearance, with  or  without  counsel,  would  not  have 
materially added to that understanding.  Therefore, the request 
for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 
The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  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 14 July 1998,  under the provisions  of AFI 
36-2603. 

Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Panel Chair 
Mr. Loren S. Perlstein, Member 
Mr. Dana J. Gilmour, Member 

4 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit 
Exhibit 
Exhibit 
Exhibit 
Exhibit 
Exhibit 
Exhibit 

A. 
B. 
C. 
D. 
E. 
F. 
G. 

DD Form 149,  dated 4  Sep 97,  w/atchs. 
Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAES, dated 1 May 97. 
Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRSO, dated 8 Sep 97. 
Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAMM, dated 1 4   Nov 97. 
Letter, AFBCMR, dated 24  Nov 97. 
Applicant's Letter, dated 18 Dec 97,  w/atchs. 

PATRICIA W ZARODKIQ~ICZ 
Panel Chair 

I 

5 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9701741

    Original file (9701741.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    To adjust applicant's .retirement date would not: be - consistent with the intent of the law; : BS At the time of his retirement, the overlap of marriage and his creditablé service ‘in determining eligibility to retired pay was 19 years, 11 months, and 29 days. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected: to show .that he was not released from active duty on 31 August 1992.and: ‘retired for length ’ case...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02816

    Original file (BC-2003-02816.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The medical group failed to process a medical evaluation board (MEB) after placing him on a “4T” profile. His request was only received after his retirement date. AFPC/DPAMM confirmed with the applicant’s physician that the reason for the applicant’s elective surgery did not meet the requirement for approval within six months of retirement.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002248

    Original file (0002248.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 5 October 2000, for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit E). At the time he applied for retirement in May 1999, to be effective 1 June 2000, his medical condition had not yet been diagnosed. In view of the above, we recommend that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00344

    Original file (BC-2006-00344.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, the Board decided to grant the applicant a measure of relief based on clemency and promoted him to the grade of senior airman with a DOR of 1 Oct 03, which allowed him an opportunity to test for promotion to the grade of SSgt and allow him to retire in that grade. They further note that HYT extensions are designed to address specific problems and issues, not to allow a member the opportunity to test for the next higher grade, which they believe the applicant’s request is based on. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802433

    Original file (9802433.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There are no provisions for pro-rating ASP/ISP for active duty Air Force physicians facing mandatory separation. Counsel submitted a response and states that although applicant was given a separation date of 30 September 1997, he was extended for medical reasons until 31 December 1997 and that during this time he performed the same duties he had been performing when he previously received both ASP and ISP payments. Applicant received a letter, dated 10 February 1997, which indicated that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03857

    Original file (BC-2004-03857.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant married and had an eligible child when he retired from military service on 1 November 2004, but he did not complete the documents necessary to properly establish his retired pay account (including an SBP election) until after his retirement date. DPFF states AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, note below para 10.9.7 states, in part, a member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. DPPRRP notes upon his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00495

    Original file (BC-1998-00495.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, states that if the AFBCMR voids the applicant’s placement on the Control Roster, which was the basis for his ineligibility for promotion to the grade of master sergeant, and he is otherwise qualified, he would be entitled to restoration of his grade. We note that the Chief, Commander’s Programs Branch, HQ AFPC//DPSFC,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800495

    Original file (9800495.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, states that if the AFBCMR voids the applicant’s placement on the Control Roster, which was the basis for his ineligibility for promotion to the grade of master sergeant, and he is otherwise qualified, he would be entitled to restoration of his grade. We note that the Chief, Commander’s Programs Branch, HQ AFPC//DPSFC,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1997 | 9503389

    Original file (9503389.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    3 AFBCMR 95-03389 now requests is follow-up care AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Medical Consultant to the AFBCMR reviewed this application and indicated that a review of the applicant's dental reeords reveals he had a dental appointment in Oct 93, the month p-rior to retirement, but that dental care could not be completed prior to retirement. The basis for the disapproval was that the applicant could receive the dental treatment he needed from the VA. After a thorough review of the facts and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02389

    Original file (BC-2005-02389.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant states he did not receive urgent, timely treatment and medical care to correct his right shoulder and neck condition. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant states he has discovered errors in the BCMR Medical Consultant’s assessment of the facts and is providing additional documentation to support his request. ...