RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03292 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) be extended from 1 Apr 16 to 1 Dec 19. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was incorrectly told at several points in his career that MSD adjustments were not possible. His MSD should change because of the extended period of time he spent in the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS). The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Air Force Reserve on 11 Mar 86. On 1 Oct 94, the applicant separated from active duty, was credited with 8 years, 10 months, and 7 days of total active service, and entered the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) in the Non-Obligated Non-Participating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS). On 2 Oct 96, the applicant was transferred from the NNRPS to the ISLRS. Under Reserve Order DA-01170, dated 16 Jan 02, the applicant was removed from the ISLRS and assigned to the United States Air Force Academy in a Category E position as an Air Liaison Officer (ALO), effective 24 Dec 01. On 15 Jan 14, NGB/A1P approved a waiver extending the applicant’s MSD to 1 Apr 16 for the purpose of serving as a dual status technician (Federal Employee/Air Technician). 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: ARPC/DPTT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice which would warrant granting relief. The applicant previously received a two-year MSD waiver extension through 1 Apr 16 approved by the NGB. In accordance with the previous version of AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, members who spent more than three years in the ISLRS are required to meet an administrative discharge board for possible discharge. The applicant was eligible to meet the ISLRS administrative discharge board on 3 Oct 99, but he never met the required discharge board and remained in ISLRS for 5 years, 2 months, and 22 days, and he never asked to resign his commission. In order to give him additional service time for the excess time he spent in ISLRS, the record would have to be changed to create a break in service after his first three years in ISLRS. However, he would then have to be reappointed as an officer, and could incur a debt because he will lose the longevity upon which his pay date has been computed. Further, such a break in service could result in a new MSD of 1 Mar 16, which is earlier than his current extended MSD of 1 Apr 16. A complete copy of the ARPC/DPTT 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 1 Apr 15 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 error or injustice. In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) serves as the office of primary responsibility (OPR) for administrative relief related to MSD changes. In view of this, we find this application is not ripe for adjudication at this level as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted. Should the applicant exhaust this administrative remedy by rendering an application for an MSD extension through his unit to SAFPC and still believe that he is the victim of an error or injustice, he could then seek relief from this Board by applying for reconsideration of this decision. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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-2014-03292 in Executive Session on 14 May 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jul 14. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/DPTT, dated 11 Mar 15. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 15.