RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00702 INDEX CODE: 121.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect restoration of 34 days of ordinary leave. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He lost 34 days of ordinary leave which was intended to be used as terminal leave and 14 days of permissive leave due to being on convalescent leave. In support of his request, the applicant provided statements in his own behalf and copies of his AF IMT Forms 988, Leave Request/Authorization. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Records indicate the applicant sold 60 days of leave on 20 Apr 86. Title 10, U.S.C., Section 501, limits payment of accrued leave to 60 days in a military career. The applicant had an approved retirement date of 1 Oct 07. He had orthopedic surgery on 11 May 07, with convalescent leave scheduled until 21 Jul 07. He requested his retirement date be extended to allow for rehabilitation and leave but the request was denied on 9 Jul 07. His attending physician provided a statement attesting that multiple attempts were made to get the applicant’s leave issue resolved through various conversations with AFPC. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial. DPSIMC states that on 4 Mar 08, a request was sent to the applicant’s losing military personnel flight to provide his convalescent leave forms or any supporting documentation to support his request. DPSIMC states that at the time of their review of the case, no additional documents had been received and they were unable to find an error or injustice by the Air Force causing the applicant to lose leave. The complete AFPC/DPSIMC evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he wants compensation for his genuine entitlement. He worked 14 months and did not take leave. His surgery could not be scheduled any earlier. His doctor requested a medical extension but it was denied. He was under the impression that service members exiting the Air Force had to be worldwide qualified. The applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial based on law. DPSIMC states the applicant carried forward 60 days of leave at the beginning of FY07. He earned 30 days of leave during fiscal year 2007 (FY07) and used 56 days of leave during FY07. His remaining days of leave at the end of FY07 were unused. Title 10, U.S.C., Section 501, limits payment for accrued leave to 60 days in a military career. The complete DPSIMC evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the doctors were aware of his retirement status prior to surgery. He sent the orthopedic section a copy of the Air Force instruction covering matters such as his. He states AFPC/SG should have been contacted before his surgery and not after the fact. Surgical procedures are not done without Air Force or Headquarters concurrence six months prior to retirement. He states the clinic has changed its procedures by adding a checklist since his surgery. He was scheduled for physical therapy on 9 Jun 07 but was unable to get therapy until the last week of June. He could not walk or drive to any of his appointments, and was not worldwide qualified. 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. 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Title 10, U.S.C., Section 501, limits payment of accrued leave to 60 days in a military career. Based on the applicant’s admission of not taking leave for 14 months, he was aware of his leave balance prior to his scheduled surgery. Surgery is not scheduled around an individual’s leave but rather the availability of medical professionals and facilities, and the degree and urgency of the medical procedure. With regard to the applicant ’s contention of being placed on medical hold, competent medical authority did not deem his condition eligible, based upon governing Air Force policy (AFI 48-123 Volume 2, paragraph 2.4) which reflect disapproval of medical hold for the purpose of evaluating or treating chronic conditions, performing diagnostic studies, civilian employment issues, elective surgery or its convalescence, other elective treatment of remedial defects, or for conditions that do not warrant termination of active duty through the Disability Evaluation System (DES). The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that his surgical treatment was other than elective nor that it would have been the cause for a referral through the DES were he not already retiring. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 Docket Number BC- 2008-00702 in Executive Session on 9 December 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-2008-00702: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 07, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIMC, undated. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Apr 08. Exhibit D. Applicant’s Rebuttal, undated, w/atchs. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIMC, dated 18 Jun 08. Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Sep 08. Exhibit G. Applicant’s E-mail, dated 27 Oct 08, w/atchs. 4 3