RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04344 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her official records be corrected to show that 1. She was promoted to the grade of Technical Sergeant (E-6) on 1 Sep 10. 2. She received separation pay. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In May 10, she applied for separation under the FY10/11 Force Management Program (FY10/11 FMP) and was approved for a separation date of 15 Aug 10. In Jun 10, the Air Force released the 10E6 selection list and she was an E-6 selectee with a projected promotion date of 1 Sep 10; however, she was briefed that she had to separate before 1 Sep 10. Her commander was willing to extend her separation date two weeks to allow her to pin on E-6 on 1 Sep 10, but the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) said she could not extend. It has recently been brought to her attention that she did not have to separate by 31 Aug, and therefore could have been promoted. If advised correctly, she could have separated into the Air Force Reserve after her 1 Sep 10 promotion date. In addition, her separation was updated incorrectly in MILPDS by AFPC and the Military Personnel Flight (MPF). Additionally, she should have received separation pay. According to her MPF, members separated under the FY10/11 FMP received between $20,000 and $22,000 in separation pay. However, at her final separation briefing she was told she was not authorized separation pay because she was separating under the FY10/11 FMP PALACE CHASE Program, not the regular PALACE CHASE Program. In support of her request, the applicant provides an expanded statement. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered active duty on 29 Feb 96. On 5 Mar 10, she signed a PALACE CHASE Statement of Understanding/Contract and was approved for separation on 15 Aug 10 under the FY10/11 FMP. On 15 Aug 10, she was furnished an Honorable discharge in order to transfer to the Air Force Reserve and was credited with 14 years, 5 months, and 17 days of active duty. The Expanded FY10/11 FMP was developed to meet Congressionally- mandated end strength requirements while positioning the force to meet current and future mission requirements. Under this program, Air Force members with qualifying AFSCs could apply during the period of 25 Mar 10 through 30 Jun 10 for a separation date to be effective no later than 1 Sep 10. For enlisted members, unit commanders were required to make recommendations on the applications. The program included the following guidance: “Individuals with approved PALACE CHASE separation dates subsequently selected for promotion may withdraw their separation to accept the promotion. Members must submit withdrawal requests within 10 workdays after promotion selection notification.” The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSOS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant provided no proof to support her contention that she was mis-counseled about her ability to serve until she was promoted to technical sergeant. In fact, the FY10/11 FMP program clearly states that the member must separate no later than 1 Sep 10. This should have been clearly briefed to the applicant by the In-Service Recruiter as well as a PALACE CHASE technician. Additionally, the separation was incorrectly coded in MILPDS as a regular PALACE CHASE separation and not a FY10/11 FMP PALACE CHASE, however, this administrative error in no way effects promotion or any type of pay. A member who volunteers to separate under any PALACE CHASE provision is not granted separation pay. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of error or injustice. The applicant was considered and tentatively selected for promotion to Technical Sergeant during cycle 10E6. Shereceived position number905.0 which would have incremented 1 Sep 10; however, applicant chose to separateeffective 15 Aug 10. IAW AFI 36-2502, Table 2.1, Minimum Eligibility Requirement for Promotion, an airman must serve onactive duty in enlisted status as of the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date, serving on continuous active duty until theeffective date of promotion. She was not eligible for promotion since she was no longer on active duty when her position numberincremented. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 1 Mar 12 for review and comment within 30 days. Asof this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided byexisting law or regulations. 2.The application was timely filed. 3.Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injusticewith regard to the applicant’s request for separation pay. The applicant contends that she should have been provided separation pay as she was separated under the provisionsof the FY10/11 Force Management Program (FY10/11FMP); however, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we are not convinced she was entitled toseparation pay. In this respect, we note there are no provisions of Air Force policy thatprovide for separation pay for thoseseparating under any PALACE CHASE program, to includethe PALACECHASE program offered as a part of the FY10/11 FMP. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the applicant’s request for separation pay. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevantevidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injusticewith respect to her request for promotion to technicalsergeant. In this respect, we believe she has raised sufficient doubt as to whether or not she was precluded from extendingher enlistment to 1 Sep 10 for the purpose of effecting her promotionprior to her discharge. We note the comments of AFPC/DPSOS indicating the FY10/11FMP requiredher to separate no later than1 Sep 10; however, in view of fact the cited policy did not preclude her from serving until 1 Sep 10, whereby she could have been promoted and subsequently discharged the same day, and noting the apparent ambiguity as to whether or not the applicant was even subject to the FY10/11 FMP, we believe it appropriate to resolve any doubt in her favor and recommend her records be corrected as indicated below. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that she was not released from active duty on 15 August 2010, but continued to serve on active duty until 1 September 2010, when she was promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) and then subsequently transferred to the Air Force Reserve. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04344 in Executive Session on 24 May 12, 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 19 Oct 11, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOS, dated 4 Jan 12. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 2 Feb 12. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Mar 12.