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
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
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.
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
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. ...
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
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
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,...
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,...
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
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. ...