RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02037 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 19 Mar 13 separation be revoked and he be allowed to reenlist without a break in service. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not briefed by the Military Personnel Section (MPS) that he could not reenlist while on terminal leave or that he needed to sign a statement of understanding (SOU). The Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) would not allow his commander to recall him from terminal leave in accordance with the governing instruction. Although he is eligible for immediate reenlistment, AFPC would not allow him to reenlist. AFPC denied his commander’s exception to policy (ETP) request for reenlistment. His reenlistment request was reconsidered and denied by AFPC due to him being on terminal leave. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of documents extracted from his military personnel records pertaining to matter at hand, and an excerpt from Air Force Instruction (AFI), 36-2606, Reenlistment in the United States Air Force. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 Apr 03, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force. On 23 Oct 12, the applicant was approved for a voluntary separation with an effective date of 19 Mar 13. On 4 Jan 13, the applicant commenced his terminal leave. On 14 Mar 13, the applicant’s commander submitted a request for an EPT to cancel the applicant’s separation and return from terminal leave. The ETP request was considered and disapproved noting the justification given was not uncommon to other Air Force members and did not prove to be in the best interest of the Air Force. It was further noted the applicant’s Control Air Force Specialty Code (CASFC) of 2T251 (Air Transportation Journeyman) was manned at 95 percent and his skill level within his CAFSC was manned at 97 percent; as such, assignments did not support the ETP request. On 19 Mar 13, the applicant was honorably discharged with a narrative reason for separation and separation program designator (SPD) code of KBK (Completion of Required Service) along with an reentry (RE) code of 1J (Eligible to reenlist but elects separation). He was credited with 9 years, 11 months and 5 days total active military service. On 26 Aug 13, the applicant enlisted in the Tennessee Air National Guard (ANG) for a period of six years. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error an injustice. Based on the documentation on file in the applicant’s master military personnel records, his discharge, to include his ETP request, was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge instruction and was within the discretion of the discharge authority. Furthermore, without the AFPC/DPA’s approval, DPSOR would not have approved the ETP request. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. On 24 Sep 12, the applicant was approved for voluntarily separation on 19 Mar 13. He went on terminal leave on 4 Jan 13, but his commander subsequently attempted to reenlist the applicant, submitting a request for an ETP to reenlist the applicant. AFPC declared his reenlistment erroneous due to the fact the applicant had already started his terminal leave. The applicant submitted a request to AFPC Separations to withdraw his approved separation, but AFPC denied his request. The applicant states he received an RE code that would allow him to reenlist within 24 hours after separation. Under the provisions of the AFI, a service member receiving a 1J RE code is eligible to reenlist; however, the AFI also states the service member is allowed to reenlist if he is otherwise eligible, must be present for duty, and will not reenlist while on leave, while in a separation status, or after departing their unit of assignment on terminal leave for separation. Although the applicant received a 1J RE code, he was not otherwise eligible for reenlistment due to his being on terminal leave. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The advisory opinion failed to address that he was not properly briefed on the effects of taking terminal leave. He would never have taken terminal leave and given up the ability to reenlist. He would have taken ordinary leave to keep his option to reenlist. His exception to policy request was cancelled due to it not being a military necessity. According to the AFI, unit commanders may recall members from leave due to military necessity or urgent, unforeseen circumstances. According to the AFI, the unit commander has the authority to determine a situation as an unforeseen circumstance. His squadron, group, and wing commanders believed his situation was an unforeseen circumstance and gave him approval to return from terminal leave to reenlist. The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ 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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, in the absence of any evidence that AFPC’s denial of the applicant’s request for an exception to policy to re-enlist was somehow erroneous or not properly based on the needs of the Air Force, we are not convinced that corrective action is warranted. While the applicant makes a variety of technical arguments intended to convince us that his commander should have been able to recall him from terminal leave for the purpose of re- enlistment, we are not persuaded that the denial of his exception to policy constitutes an error or injustice when his Air Force specialty was manned at nearly 100 percent. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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 issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-02037 in Executive Session on 13 Feb 14 and 23 Apr 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 3 Jun 13. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 3 Jun 13. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 13. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Jul 13. Panel Chair