RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-03785
								INDEX CODE:  110.00
								COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His request for retirement effective 1 Jun 09 be withdrawn, and his promotion sequence number for promotion to the grade of master sergeant be reinstated.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was under the impression the Promotion Statement of Understanding (PSU) would automatically initiate his request for retirement withdrawal.  The PSU instructions do not clearly direct a person to complete the withdrawal process through the Virtual Military Personnel Flight (VMPF).

In support of the request, the applicant provides a copy of his PSU, a copy of his retirement application, and a copy of a Request to Withdraw Retirement Application Memorandum.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant submitted an application for retirement on 19 Jun 08 with a retirement effective date of 1 Jun 09.  AFPC/DPSOR approved his retirement and he was issued retirement orders dated 20 Jun 08.

The Air Force released the master sergeant promotion list on 26 Jun 08.  The applicant received the PSU on 30 Jun 08, and returned it on 10 Jul 08.

He received an auto-generated retirement out-processing email on 19 Aug 08.  He submitted a request to withdraw his retirement on 20 Aug 08.  On 2 Sep 08, the applicant’s request for withdrawal of his retirement application was disapproved.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOE states in part, the PSU is an informative document regarding certain requirements when selected for promotion to the grades of master sergeant through chief master sergeant.  It outlines requirements of accepting the promotion and consequences if those requirements are not met.  If the applicant felt that paragraph 2 of the PSU was unclear regarding the withdrawal of his retirement application, he should have asked for clarification before signing.

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial and states in part, that since the applicant did not have a projected promotion on file at the time he submitted his retirement withdrawal request based on his desire to accept a promotion, policy requires disapproval of his request to withdraw his retirement.  

The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 Jan 09, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

________________________________________________________________

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 warranting corrective action.  After a thorough review of all the facts and circumstances of this case, and the documentation presented in support of the appeal, we believe it is reasonable to conclude there may have been some confusion on the applicant’s part as to the action he was supposed to accomplish in order to accept his promotion to MSgt and withdraw his retirement application.  We took particular note of the actions by the applicant to accept the promotion in a timely manner and his statement that he assumed this action would automatically withdraw his retirement application.  It appears the applicant’s confusion resulted from his inexperience and unfamiliarity with the VMPF and the new retirement process.  In view of the foregoing, as well as the applicant’s desire to continue in the service of his country, we are inclined to resolve all doubt regarding this matter in his favor.  Accordingly, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent set forth below.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

	a.  On 10 Jul 08, he requested a withdrawal of his 1 Jun 09 length of service retirement, as a result of his selection for promotion to the grade of master sergeant (E‑7) during the 08E7 promotion cycle, and it was approved by competent authority.

	b.  He was promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7) effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 08.

	c.  He was not relieved from active duty on 31 May 09 and retired for length of service, effective 1 Jun 09, but continued to serve on extended active duty, and was ordered permanent change of station (PCS) to his home of record or home of selection pending further orders.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2008-03785 in Executive Session on 2 Jun 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
				XXXXXXXXXX, Member
				XXXXXXXXXX, Member

All members voted to correct the record, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered under Docket Number BC-2008-03785:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Oct 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPSOE, dated 29 Oct 08.
    Exhibit D.  AFPC/DPSOR, dated 3 Nov 08.
    Exhibit E.  SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jan 09.

                                   XXXXXXXXXX
                                   Panel Chair