RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00950 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His official record be amended to reflect he accepted separation pay prior to being separated for High Year Tenure (HYT). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was misinformed by an Air National Guard (ANGUS) recruiter that if he elected separation pay, it would negatively affect his ability to join the ANGUS. Prior to separation, he declined separation pay, based on erroneous advice, and later discovered that information was incorrect. He now needs the agreement to reflect he elected to accept separation pay, in order to receive the pay. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 3 Feb 99, the applicant initially entered the Air Force Reserve. On 5 Dec 13, prior to separation, the applicant initialed an Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) agreement conditional for enlisted separation pay, indicating he did not agree to serve in the IRR for a period of not less than three years following his separation from active duty and understood he would not receive separation pay. On 3 Feb 14, the applicant was honorably released from active duty, with a narrative reason of Reduction in Force (RIF), and was credited with 15 years and 1 day of active service. On 16 May 14, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve for a period of five years. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant's separation for RIF was processed in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Administrative Separation of Airmen. The applicant was informed, as a condition of receiving separation pay; he must sign an agreement to serve in the IRR for a period of not less than three years following his separation from active duty. The applicant signed a statement on 5 Dec 13, refusing to agree to serve in the IRR, with the understanding that he would not receive separation pay. The applicant's claim of miscounseling is primarily directed at an ANGUS recruiter not affiliated with the separations office at his losing base; however, a review of the records indicates his separation was processed in accordance with the procedures outlined in the applicable guidance. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While the applicant contends that he was mis-counseled that accepting separation pay would adversely affect his ability to enlist in the Air National Guard (ANG), other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence that his decision to decline separation pay was the result of an error on the part of the Air Force. Therefore, absent any documentation that would support the applicant’s argument on this point (e.g., a supporting statement from the recruiter that allegedly gave him erroneous advice), we do not find the evidence presented sufficient to conclude the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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-2014-00950 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00950 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 9 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14.