RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02472
            INDEX CODE:

      XXXXXXXXXXXX     COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXX     HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  9 FEB 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His records be corrected to show restoration of 35  days  of  lost
leave.

2.  His records be corrected to show he separated on 28 February 2005,
rather than 31 January 2005, and retired on 1 March 2005, rather  than
1 February 2005.

3.  He be retired in the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  rather  than
major.

4.  He be paid for 28 active duty days for the month of February  2005
at the grade of lieutenant colonel and for 2.5 days of leave  for  the
month of February 2005.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He applied for an extension of 24 days to his Reserve extended  active
duty (EAD) limited period call  (LPC)  tour,  which  was  subsequently
denied.  He then submitted retirement paperwork on 21 October 2004 and
received his retirement  orders  on  25  December  2004,  but  due  to
receiving his orders late he lost 35 days leave, which  he  could  not
sell back.

He applied for a 24-day extension which would allow him to  retire  in
the grade of lieutenant colonel, but his extension request was  denied
due to Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) end-strength manning requirements.   He
was then involuntarily retired as a major and only 24  days  short  of
the six-months Time-in-Grade (TIG) required to retire in that grade of
lieutenant colonel.  He believes his  involuntary  retirement  in  the
grade of major and denial of his extension request was unjust since  a
24-day extension would have had no bearing on end-strength numbers  as
his retirement date would have fallen well within the FY05 timeframe.

In support of his application, the applicant  provided  Special  Order
AGA-010, LPC Extension Request, EAD Extension Request  Denial  Letter,
AF Form 1160, Military Retirement Actions, Special Order AC-002807, DD
Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, copies
of AF IMT 988, Leave Request/Authorization,  AF  Form  709,  Promotion
Recommendation and excerpts from his military personnel records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in  the  Air  Force
Reserve on 8 January 1985 and was progressively promoted to the  grade
of major.

On 18 December 2001, he was voluntarily  ordered  to  Extended  Active
Duty for a period  of  three  years  and  promoted  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel.

On  19  August  2004,  the  applicant’s   commander   requested   that
applicant’s three-year tour be extended 24 days from 4  February  2005
to 28 February 2005, citing mission requirements  and  that  applicant
would be able to hold the grade of lieutenant colonel on  the  Reserve
Active Status List (RASL) for six  months.   On  4 October  2004,  the
request for the tour extension was disapproved by HQ  AFPC/DPPA  under
Force Shaping Phase II policy, to which no exceptions were authorized.

On 4 January 2005, while serving  on  the  LPRP  tour,  the  applicant
reached 20 years of total active  federal  military  service  (TAFMS),
providing him the opportunity for an active duty retirement.   At  the
completion of his LPRP tour, he could either  separate  or  apply  for
retirement effective 1 February 2005, in the  grade  of  major.     He
retired effective 1 February 2005 in the grade of major.

He retired on 1 February 2005, in the grade of major, after serving  a
total of 20 years and 23 days of service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPF recommends approval to restore 35 days of  lost  leave.   DPF
states the applicant provided documentation  verifying  the  timelines
which prevented him from taking some of his  accrued  leave  prior  to
retiring.

Due to  the  timing  of  the  applicant’s  extension  disapproval  and
resulting  retirement  approval,  leave  opportunities  were  severely
hampered.  As a result, applicant  was  unable  to  take  all  of  his
accrued leave before he retired.

The complete DPF evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAOO recommends denial to the applicant’s  request  to  correct
his separation and retirement dates to reflect 28 February 2005 and  1
March  2005,  respectively.   DPPAOO  states  the  applicant  was  not
guaranteed an extension at the onset of the LPRP tour and  disapproval
of his LPRP extension was in accordance with  guidance  set  forth  in
administering the LPRP Program.

According to DPPAOO in May 2004, Phase II of the Force Shaping Program
was implemented to assist  the  Air  Force  in  meeting  end  strength
requirements and to properly shape the force.   Phase  II  closed  the
Limited EAD Program (also referred to as LPRP).  In addition, Phase II
guidance did not authorize extensions for members serving on EAD under
LPRP.  Phase II stated officers  serving  on  active  duty  under  the
Limited EAD Program were to return to retired/separation  status  upon
completion of the Limited EAD tour with no extensions  authorized  and
no exceptions to policy authorized.

DPPAOO states, as the applicant indicates, prior to his acceptance  of
EAD under LPRP, extensions to LPRP tours  were  being  considered  and
granted on a case-by-case  basis.   However,  as  the  applicant  also
indicates, the extensions  were  being  granted  based  on  post  9-11
manning issues.

The complete DPPAOO evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPRRP recommends denial of the applicant’s request to retire  in
the grade of lieutenant colonel and denial of restoration of his  lost
leave.

DPPRRP states Reserve officers recalled for a period of three years or
less remain on the Reserve Active Status  List  (RASL)  for  promotion
purposes  and  do  not  count   against   active   duty   end-strength
limitations.  On 19 August 2004, the applicant’s  commander  requested
that applicant’s three-year tour be extended 24 days from  4  February
2005 to 28 February 2005, citing mission  requirements  and  that  the
applicant would be able to hold the grade of lieutenant colonel on the
RASL for six months.  On 4 October 2004,  the  request  for  the  tour
extension was disapproved by HQ AFPC/DPPA under Force Shaping Phase II
policy, to which no exceptions were authorized.  If the applicant  had
served on active duty for even one  day  beyond  4 February  2005,  he
would have counted against active duty end-strength.

Of note is the statement made by the applicant’s  commander  that  the
applicant   wished   to   continue   service    as    a    traditional
Reservist/Guardsman upon retirement.  A  Reserve  officer  who  is  on
active duty,  has  20  years  of  active  service,  10  of  which  are
commissioned service, is eligible to do one of three things upon their
DOS.  The Reserve officer can request an  active  duty  retirement  in
their current grade as long as they have 6-months TIG;  separate  from
active duty on their  DOS,  then  request  a  Reserve  retirement  and
receive retired  pay  at  age  60;  or  fill  out  an  AF  Form  1288,
Application for Ready Reserve Assignment,  and  work  with  a  Reserve
recruiter to find a reserve slot in their reserve grade, then continue
to earn points for retirement pay at age 60.

The applicant states that he was involuntarily  retired,  but  he  did
have another option to separate and continue  his  career  in  an  Air
Reserve Component (ARC).  In fact, the applicant, even  as  a  retired
member can request an assignment within the ARC under  the  provisions
of 10 USC 10145.  If he is selected for an Active Guard/Reserve  (AGR)
position or otherwise activated as  a  retiree,  he  may  be  able  to
fulfill the required TIG to be reverted to retired status in the grade
of lieutenant colonel.

According to DPPRRP, the applicant requested retirement on  21 October
2004, indicating that he requested to retire on his mandatory date  of
1 February 2005 when he did not  have  a  mandatory  retirement  date.
Reserve lieutenant colonels may continue  to  participate  until  they
have 28 years of total federal commissioned service (TFCS).

The applicant’s TFCS date is 1 June 1984, so he could  have  continued
to serve in the ARC in the grade of lieutenant colonel  until  31  May
2012  unless  promoted  on  the  RASL  to  colonel.   The  applicant’s
separation code is RBCC; “voluntary retirement on date  established  -
reserve commissioned officer.”

DPPRRP  states  the  request  to  extend  the  applicant’s  tour   was
disapproved on 4 October 2004, thereby  fixing  his  separation  date.
The member need not wait on retirement orders to begin using his leave
under “normal” leave provisions.  Furthermore, the  applicant  clearly
demonstrates he was fully aware of his  leave  balance  based  on  his
application.  It is apparent the applicant made no  effort  to  expend
his leave balance beyond that taken under  terminal  leave  provisions
prior to his separation and retirement.

A complete copy of the DPPRRP evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states the requested extension would have allowed him to
retire 24 days later on 1 March  2005,  which  would  have  been  well
within the FY05 congressionally mandated end strength requirement  for
force shaping phase II.

He seriously considered turning down the  active  duty  retirement  in
order to continue  his  career.   However,  with  force  shaping  also
affecting the ARC, there was a strong possibility that he  might  once
again be faced with being selectively  non-retained,  only  this  time
without retirement or benefits until age 60.  His only logical  choice
was to retire in the grade of lieutenant colonel and attempt to return
to the Guard or Reserve in that grade.

The applicant states he used his leave as best he could based  on  the
needs of his commander and the USAF; however, leave opportunities were
severely hampered due to the timing of his extension disapproval.

He believes the decisions to disapprove his request is primarily based
on the “no exceptions” policy regarding phase II  force  shaping,  and
“no guarantee” of  an  extension.   The  applicant  believes  this  is
particularly harsh in his case since all he asked for was 24  days  to
complete his active duty career, and to recover his lost leave.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice  to  warrant  providing  the
applicant restoration and payment for 35 days of leave.  The Board is
persuaded that the applicant’s leave opportunities were impacted  due
to the timing of  his  request  for  an  extension  of  service,  the
subsequent disapproval of that request, and his retirement  approval.
In view of the above, and in order to resolve any  injustice  to  the
applicant, we recommend that his records be corrected to  the  extent
indicated below.

4.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence  of  error  or  injustice  regarding  the  remainder  of
applicant’s requests.  In this respect, we note the applicant was  not
guaranteed an extension at the onset of his LPRP tour and  disapproval
of his LPRP extension was in accordance with  guidance  set  forth  in
administering the LPRP program at that  time.   The  Board  notes  the
Force Shaping Program in force at that time stated phase  II  officers
serving on active duty in the Limited EAD Program were  to  return  to
retired/separation status upon completion of the Limited EAD tour with
no extensions authorized and no exceptions to the policy.   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.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence  to  the
contrary,  we  find  no  basis  upon  which  to  recommend   favorable
consideration of this portion of the application.

_________________________________________________________________



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 in a temporary
duty status for a sufficient number of days and was paid a  total  per
diem in an amount equivalent to 35 days of basic pay.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  BC-2005-
02472 in Executive Session on 28 March 2006, under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                       Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

All  members  voted  to  correct  the  record,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Forms  149, dated 25 Jul 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPF, dated 19 Sep 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAOO, dated 4 Nov 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 9 Nov 05.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 05.
      Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 9 Jan 06, w/atchs.




                             JAY H. JORDAN
                             Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2005-02472




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that he was in a
temporary duty status for a sufficient number of days and was paid a total
per diem in an amount equivilant to 35 days of basic pay.








  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency