RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03240
INDEX CODE: 121.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His retirement date be adjusted by 60 days and his retirement pay be
adjusted accordingly.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not allowed to take 60 days of terminal leave due to his medical
discharge and was forced to sell the leave. His complete submission is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 19 Nov 81. He was
progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant, having assumed that
grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jan 00. On 12 Jun 02, he was
permanently retired for disability reasons with a 20 percent disability
rating. He served 20 years, 6 months, and 23 days on active duty.
The applicant sold 60 days of leave prior to his retirement. He was
granted 20 days of permissive TDY from 26 Apr 02 through 15 May 02, and
took 27 days of terminal leave from 16 May 02 through 11 Jun 02.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSFM recommends denial. DPSFM states that he was required to sell 60
days leave due to his disability retirement. AFI 36-3003 requires members
to receive payment for up to 60 days accrued leave and affords them time to
take any accrued leave in excess of the 60-day limit. The Physical
Disability Division determines a member’s separation date, taking into
account the leave balance and leave accruing in excess of the 60-day leave
payment limitation. He received a disability retirement and was required
to sell 60 days of accrued leave and use any leave over the 60-day limit as
terminal leave. The DPSFM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. DPPD states that individuals undergoing
disability processing who have not sold 60 days of leave after 10 Feb 76
during their military career must sell their accrued leave at separation or
retirement. The separation/retirement date is established by adding the
member’s accrued leave, the number of permissive TDY days authorized by the
unit commander, and 20 days processing time to come to the projected
separation/retirement date. Members retiring or separating for disability
are authorized to use accrued leave that they cannot sell back as a result
of this process. The excess leave is formulated in establishing the final
separation/retirement date to include any days accumulated during this
processing period. A review of his disability case reveals that he did not
face any personal hardship over and above that encountered by other service
members being separated/retired for a disability. The DPPD evaluation is
at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20
Dec 02 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice that would warrant adjustment of the
applicant's date of retirement. Evidence has not been presented which
would lead us to believe that the standards of Air Force policy were not
appropriately applied in this case or that he was treated differently than
others in similar circumstances. Therefore, we agree with the opinions and
recommendations of the Air Force offices 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. 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 Docket Number BC-2002-03240
in Executive Session on 9 Apr 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha Maust, Member
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 02.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSFM, dated 21 Nov 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 4 Dec 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Dec 02.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03610
A complete copy of the Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommended denial, indicating that a review of the disability processing records does not show any variances from normal procedures for a member in the Air Force Disability Evaluation System (DES). Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-POCC indicated that their records show that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00642
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00642 INDEX NUMBER: 121.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement date be changed from 1 Feb 03 to 1 May 03 in order to use the 68 days of leave he had accrued. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRRP recommends that the applicant be paid...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03250
The AFPC/DPSFM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPD recommends the application be denied. Based on these calculations, DPPD believes that the applicant was not denied any accrued leave through 9 September 2002, the time of his placement on the TDRL. In addition, the Disability Retirement Date Calculator correctly projected the accrued leave up until the established retirement date.
The LES for July 1985 indicates that he entered active duty on 12 Jun 85 with 4.5 days of accrued leave. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSFM reviewed applicant's request and recommends that his records be corrected as...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00415
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He had accumulated 58 days of leave when he left active duty to enter the AFROTC program. Prior service members who attend AFROTC and fulfill their obligations to AFROTC, Air Force Reserves and the Air Force should have their unused leave reinstated. DOD Financial Management Regulation directs payment for accrued leave upon discharge up to the 60-day maximum limit.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02792
The DPSFM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRRP recommends approval based on the fact that he sold back 28 days of leave based on information provided to him by his Financial Service Office. Since applicant had requested a retirement date of 1 Sep 02, we do not believe that a change in his retirement is warranted. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2003-02792 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03476
Since the applicant sold the maximum 60 days of leave previously, he is ineligible to sell his 42 days of lost leave in conjunction with his 1 Dec 2012 retirement. Although he was paid for 60 days of accrued leave in conjunction with his 1 Jul 1995 retirement, the evidence reflects that he was recalled to active duty in Jul 2009 under the Rated Officer Recall Program and retired again on 1 Dec 2012. Therefore, in the interest of justice we recommend the applicants Extended Active Duty...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03490
DPSFM states that the Master Military Pay Account should be corrected to reflect 29 days, the combined periods of convalescent leave, as lost leave after the applicant retired. Since the applicant has already been paid for 60 days of leave, DPSFM recommends that his retirement date be adjusted by 29 days, for the period of lost leave. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Field Operations Branch, AFPC/DPSFM, reviewed the application and states that in accordance with Title 10 USC 701, members cannot sell more than a cumulative total of 60 days leave during a military career. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01234
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Further, the Board notes the applicant submitted no evidence to substantiate his claim his final payment was in error with respect to...