RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01313 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air National Guard (ANG) retirement effective date of 30 September 2009 be withdrawn. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received incorrect information from the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) in regard to his assignment to Extended Active Duty (EAD) under the Retired Rated Officer Recall Program (RRORP) versus the Limited Period Recall Program (LPRP). There is a key difference between LPRP and RRORP in regards to promotion opportunities. It has always been his desire to serve in the military until the maximum time allowable. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, electronic communications, messages on the LPRP and RRORP programs, and commander support for his retirement reversal request. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on EAD under the RRORP in the grade of lieutenant colonel with a date of rank of 1 October 2004 and an effective date of 1 December 2009. The remaining relevant facts are contained in the evaluation provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPP recommends denial. DPP states the applicant did not request to withdraw his retirement application prior to the effective date as required. A review of his record indicates he is eligible for Reserve retired pay under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 12731, effective on 24September 2023, his 60thbirthday. He submitted a Reserve retirement application on 9 July 2009requesting a retirement effective 30 September 2009. The application was approved and theretirement processing completed. On 21 July 2009, the retirement order was sent to the applicant. According to their case management system, the applicant called the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) on 9 October 2009, requesting information on how to withdraw his Reserve retirement application. Since the retirement date had already passed, he was advised that only the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) could approve his withdrawal request. The ARPC retirement technician recommended he file an application to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records requesting his retirement be cancelled or withdrawn. The applicant was recalled to active duty under the RRORP on 1December 2009. His current status is as a Reservist on EAD. The complete ARPC/DPPevaluation, with attachment,is at Exhibit B. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: While the ARPC/DPP advisory opinion is mostly accurate in a technical sense, it does not address the basic premise of his complaint that he had specifically asked questions of AFPC regarding stopping his retirement processing and received incorrect information that he did not discover to be incorrect until it was too late. He did not request withdrawal of his retirement application prior to the retirement effective date because he based his decision on incorrect information provided by AFPC. If he had known the differences between the LPRP and RRORP, he would not have hesitated to stop retirement processing. Moreover, given the timing, he would have had only a maximum of one working day to get that done. He should not be penalized by acting on incomplete or incorrect information from an official source, or for an unusually short amount of time between his scheduled retirement date and the date he received his assignment. Overturning his retirement will permit him to remain in the Air Force Reserve beyond his recall EAD tour, and afford him the opportunity to compete for promotion. The applicant’s complete rebuttal is at Exhibit D. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2.The application was timely filed. 2 3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record, the Board majority notes the applicant attempted to be recalled to Extended Active Duty (EAD) under the LPRP prior to his retirement effective date. Even though he was offered an EAD assignment prior to his retirement, miscounseling, and to secure his assignment caused his recall to EAD to begin after his retirement effective date and under the RRORP. The fact he was recalled to EAD under the RRORP rather than the LPRP resulted in him missing an opportunity to be considered by 2010 Colonels Promotion Board. Given the strong support from the applicant’s chain of command and the well-documented correspondence in support of his application, a majority of the Board believes any doubt in this case should be resolved in the applicant’s favor. Therefore, the Board majority recommends his 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: a. He was not released from the Air National Guard on 29 September 2009. b. He submitted a request to withdraw his retirement on 29 September 2009 and the request was approved by competent authority. c. He was recalled to active duty under the Limited Period Recall Program effective 1 December 2009. d. If he has missed promotion opportunity, his records be considered by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year 2010 United States Air Force Reserve Line and Non-Line Colonels Promotion Selection Board. _______________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01313 in Executive Session on 2 December 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: By a majority vote, the Board recommended to grant the application. XXX voted to deny the applicant’s request; however, elected not to submit a minority report. The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010- 01313 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Mar 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPP, dated 25 May 10, w/atch. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 May 10. Exh