RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01177
            INDEX CODE:  121.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be compensated for 102 days of unused annual leave.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unable to take the leave due to a very short notice disapproval
of his initial and subsequent requests for a waiver of his  High  Year
of Tenure (HYT).

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  documentation
pertaining to his HYT waiver.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  24  Mar  75.   He  was
relieved from active duty on 31 Mar 04 and  retired,  effective  1 Apr
04, in the grade of senior master sergeant.  He was credited  with  29
years and 7 days of total active service.

Applicant lost 102 days of annual leave at the time of his retirement.
 He had previously sold 60 days of annual leave, which is the  maximum
amount allowed by law.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSFOC recommended approval noting  the  applicant  requested  an
extension of his HYT in Nov 03, but was disapproved by AFPC/DPPRR on 4
Feb 04.  The applicant submitted a second request to extend his HYT on
10 Feb 04 and that request was disapproved  on  11  Mar  04.   In  his
second request, the applicant requested AFPC/DPPRR extend his HYT  for
12 months.  If that was not possible, he requested they extend it  for
six months to enable him to use all of his accrued leave  as  terminal
leave.  He advised the  Air  Force  Personnel  Center  (AFPC)  of  his
current  leave  balance  and  indicated  that  if  his   request   was
disapproved, he would lose  his  leave.   AFPC/DPSFOC  indicated  that
since his second  request  was  disapproved  on  11  Mar  04  and  his
retirement date was 1 Apr 04, this only left the applicant enough time
to out-process the Air Force prior to his  retirement.   They  believe
the applicant’s retirement date should be adjusted to include the  102
days of unused leave.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSFOC evaluation is at Exhibit B.

AFPC/DPPRRP recommended denial indicating the  applicant  had  already
received an HYT extension of one year; extensions are limited  to  one
year.  His request for an additional extension was filed on 7 Nov  03,
well after the deadline of Sep 03 for filing an extension request.  He
made no preparations for retirement,  banking  on  his  request  being
approved.  After he received disapproval of his request on 4  Feb  04,
he still did not apply nor prepare for retirement, knowing  he  had  a
DOS of 14 Apr 04.  As late as 12 Mar 04, a month prior to his DOS,  he
had not applied for retirement.  In AFPC/DPPRRP’s view, the  applicant
had ample time and warning to request retirement and  to  program  his
leave in conjunction with his retirement.  The  unit  mission  had  no
bearing upon his  lack  of  timely  action.   However,  if  relief  is
granted, they do not believe it should be in the form of an adjustment
of the applicant’s retirement date.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRRP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant  on  4
Jun 04 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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.   The  applicant's  complete
submission was thoroughly  reviewed  and  his  contentions  were  duly
noted.  However, we do not find the  applicant’s  assertions  and  the
documentation  provided  in  support  of   his   appeal   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by AFPC/DPPRRP.  We note
that as a senior master sergeant, the applicant had a HYT of 28  years
of Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS).  We  also  note  his
HYT had already been extended by one year.  According to  AFPC/DPPRRP,
the governing Air Force Instruction requires  that  a  fully-justified
HYT extension request be submitted no earlier than  one  year  and  no
later than six  months  before  an  individual’s  HYT.   They  further
indicated  the  maximum  extension  period  is  one  year.   When  the
applicant submitted his request for a second extension, it appears  he
did  so  well  after  the  deadline.   Since  AFPC/DPPRRP  has  stated
approvals of HYT are rare, the applicant did not submit his request in
a timely manner, and the fact  he  had  already  received  a  one-year
extension of his HYT, we believe the applicant exercised poor judgment
by not making any preparation  for  his  retirement,  to  include  the
prudent use of his leave in conjunction with his  retirement,  in  the
event his second request was not approved.  In view of the  foregoing,
and in the absence of sufficient evidence to the  contrary,  we  agree
with the recommendation of the AFPC/DPPRRP and adopt  their  rationale
as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden of establishing that he has suffered either an error or  an
injustice.  Accordingly, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-01177 in Executive Session on 22 Jul 04, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member
      Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2004-
01177 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Apr 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSFOC, dated 10 May 04.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 18 May 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 04.




                                   LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                   Panel Chair