RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03907
		INDEX NUMBER:  121.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The five days of leave charged for the period 12 through 16 Nov 02 be restored.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He advised his recruiter before his EAD orders were cut that he could not report before 18 Nov 02 due to his having to get current ACLS certification, which he needed to practice as an Air Force physician.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a physician serving on active duty in the grade of major.  He was ordered to extended active duty (EAD) via Special Order AH-----, dated 5 Nov 02, with an EAD date of 8 Nov 02.  The applicant was given four travel days and had a report not later than date (RNLTD) of not later than 2400 hours on 11 Nov 02.  The applicant reported for duty on 17 Nov 02.  The applicant was charged five days of leave from 12-16 Nov 02.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAMF2 recommends denial of the applicant’s request.

Applicant’s EAD order was published on 5 Nov 02 and provided to applicant by mail.  The EAD order indicated that the applicant was to report not later than 11 Nov 02.  Applicant contacted his recruiter rather than the office that published the orders to request a later reporting date.  There is no statement that shows the recruiter concurred with the applicant’s request.  The EAD order specifies contacting AFPC/DPAMF for any issues prior to departing.  In addition, a fact sheet was provided to applicant with instructions under reporting data that indicates, “Always follow these instructions closely as they can affect pay and entitlements.”  The Medical Accessions Program Manager was not contacted by the applicant or recruiter regarding the request.

The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant responded by stating that it appears his appeal has been misunderstood.  He told his recruiter before his orders were issued that he would be attending ACLS certification on 13 Nov 02 and would not be able to report to Lackland Air Force Base before 17 Nov 02.  His message was somehow not relayed.  He now knows that he should have reported and had the Air Force pay for his ACLS certification.  He would not have been able to work since his ALCS certification had expired.  He is only asking not to be charged leave since he told those that needed to know that he could not make it before 17 Nov 02.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the applicant provided information on when he reported for active duty and how much leave he was charged.  Applicant did not have a copy of his travel voucher, but provided a copy of his travel voucher summary.

The applicant’s complete submission, 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.  The Board finds it reasonable that the applicant may have contacted his recruiter rather than following the instructions provided to him with his EAD orders.  We also note that the applicant delayed his reporting to receive training necessary to perform his duties as an Air Force physician.  Although we have determined that the applicant could have waited and received the training after he reported for active duty, it appears that his actions were motivated by a desire to report for duty with all the necessary credentials.  As such, after reviewing the complete circumstances of his case, we believe that charging the applicant leave could be perceived as an injustice.  Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that during the period 12 through 16 November 2002, he was in a duty status rather than ordinary leave status.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2002-03907 in Executive Session on 21 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Dec 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPAMF2, dated 23 Jan 03.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Jan 03.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Apr 03.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.

                                   

AFBCMR BC-2002-03907

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 XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show that during the period 12 through 16 November 2002, he was in a duty status rather than ordinary leave status.