RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02445 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His leave of 6.5 days be restored to his current leave balance. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He deployed to a combat zone, receiving hostile fire pay, from February to August 2012. On 1 October 2012, he lost 16.5 days of leave, due to his inability to take leave during that deployment. In March 2013, the leave was restored as Special Leave Accrual (SLA). Per his March 2013 Leave and Earnings Statement (LES), this combat zone carryover expires on 30 September 2015. Per AFI 36-3003, paragraph 10.2.1., members are authorized to retain SLA for four fiscal years. He confirmed this through the 86th CPTS. They indicated that he could retain the 16.5 days of SLA for four fiscal years. However, on 1 October 2013, he again lost 6.5 days of leave. He used 35 days of leave in Fiscal Year 2013 (FY2013), and in the six month period between March and October 2013, he was awarded 16.5 days of SLA leave, and lost 6.5 days of annual leave. Through discussion with the 86th CPTS, it is clear no one understands the SLA calculations. Several CPTS personnel tried to assist, each with a different calculation. The 86th CPTS/CC determined the 6.5 days lost was due to a “system glitch.” In their own investigation, 86th CPTS diligently tried to obtain an explanation from AFPC without results. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of lieutenant colonel. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit B & D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. DPSIM states the applicant provided the CMS case that discusses his SLA request. In the CMS case, the applicant requested restoration of 6.5 days of lost leave. The applicant’s request was denied because his leave dropped below his protected leave balance. IAW AFI 36-3003, para 10.3.1, “The maximum amount will be reduced to a new level whenever the leave balance drops below the previously set level. If, at any time, the leave balance drops to or goes below 60 days (75 days during the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2015), SLA leave is no longer considered protected leave. Therefore, the actual maximum leave that can be carried forward into succeeding fiscal years is the lowest leave balance achieved following the completion of the SLA duty or the usual 60 days (75 days during the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2015), whichever is greater.” According to the DJMS printout of the applicant’s leave balance provided by DFAS, the applicant started FY 12 with 91.5 days of leave. He took three days of leave in December 2013, after accumulating five days of leave, which put his balance at 89.5 days of leave. In April 2014, the applicant took an additional 17 days of leave and accrued ten days of leave. His leave balance dropped to 81.5 days of leave, four days below the protected leave balance. In July 2014, the member took eight more days of leave and accrued five days of leave. The member’s ending leave balance in July 2014 was 80 days of leave. With that being said, the applicant lost 6.5 days of leave when his leave balanced dropped below his protected leave balance. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit B. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The SLA was a result of his deployment from February to August 2012. The advisory opinion indicates that he “started FY12 with 91.5 days” - he did not. It is impossible for him to have carried forward a large leave balance into “FY12” because the deployment resulting in the SLA did not occur until after the start of FY12. Additionally, he did not deploy from FY09-11. Therefore, he would not have been able to carry forward such a large leave balance as indicated in the OPR advisory. He started FY13 with the maximum 75 days of leave, having just lost 16.5 use/lose days as a result of the deployment; leave which was returned as SLA and was awarded on 22 March 2013. It was not until 22 March 2013 that his leave balance reached 91.5 days. Finally, it does not make common sense for the Air Force to award SLA caused by deployments and then require the member to take the SLA within the last six months of the FY in which it was awarded. He earned the 16.5 days of leave during FY12, half of the year while deployed, but it was not awarded back to him until six months into FY13. AFPC’s opinion, albeit littered with incorrect facts, advocates for members losing that SLA unless it is used within the last six months remaining in the FY. Further, he was counseled and was informed that he would not lose the SLA until the end of FY15. The applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM was asked to provide an additional advisory to address the applicant’s rebuttal comments. AFPC/DPSIM again recommends denial, indicating the applicant’s request to restore his lost leave was denied because his leave balance dropped below his protected leave balance. IAW AFI 36-3003, paragraph 10.3.1, “the maximum amount will be reduced to a new level whenever the leave balance drops below the previously set level. If, at any time, the leave balance drops to or goes below 60 days (75 days during the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2015), SLA leave is no longer considered protected leave. Therefore, the actual maximum leave that can be carried forward into succeeding fiscal years is the lowest leave balance achieved following the completion of the SLA duty or the usual 60 days (75 days during the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2015), whichever is greater.” Paragraph 10.1, states, “leave in Excess of 60 Days at the End of the Fiscal Year - SLA allows members who are faced with circumstances that prohibit them from taking leave to accumulate leave in excess of 60 days (75 days until September 30, 2015). The situation preventing members from using leave must have been caused by a catastrophe, national emergency and/or crisis or operations in defense of national security. Furthermore, it should be a result of the members’ inability to take leave or to reduce their leave balance to 60 days (75 days from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2015) before the end of the fiscal year while being assigned to said activities. SLA shall not be used as a means to authorize the accumulation of leave in excess of 60 days (75 days from October 1, 2008 through September 30, 2015) that is a result of members' failure to properly manage their leave balance. The applicant ended FY12 with 91.5 days; the 16.5 days lost (Number of days over 75) at the beginning of FY13 were restored in March 2013. The actual maximum leave that can be carried forward into succeeding fiscal years is the lowest leave balance achieved following the completion of the SLA duty or the usual 60 days (75 days during the period October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2015), whichever is greater.” In this case, the lowest leave balance achieved (80 days) was the greater of the two. In summary, during FY13 the member dropped his protected leave balance from 91.5 days of leave to 80 days of leave. Therefore, the applicant’s new protected leave balance was adjusted to 80 days of leave. The applicant ended FY13 with 86.5 days of leave, which is 6.5 days over the protected leave balance of 80 days which resulted in the applicant losing 6.5 days of leave. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant is baffled by how many different explanations AFPC needs on this issue to provide the AFBCMR a valid advisory opinion. The first advisory opinion was based entirely on incorrect and irrelevant facts. Now, six months later, AFPC generates a second advisory opinion that again states incorrect facts. How many years and how many AFPC advisory opinions are required to show the confusion inherent in SLA calculation by the SME, let alone Air Force members? Bottom line, there was an error in the system, either in the technical calculations or in the advice provided to him by numerous SMEs. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the circumstances of this case, the majority of the Board believes that favorable consideration of the applicant’s request is warranted. While the Board acknowledges the recommendations of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) to deny the requested relief, the majority of the Board believes the applicant was miscounseled regarding the SLA. The Board notes the apparent complexities of the SLA policy, past and present, plus the additional burden when crossing fiscal years could inherently present accounting challenges for the applicant and the Air Force. Therefore, the majority of the Board believes the applicant’s loss of leave amounts to an injustice and 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 the APPLICANT, be corrected to show that six and a half (6.5) days of leave be restored to his current leave balance. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02445 in Executive Session on 17 August 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: By a majority vote, the Board recommended approval of the application. Mr. Allen voted to deny the applicant’s request but does not desire to submit a minority report. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014- 02445 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 June 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 2 February 2015. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 February 2015.