RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-05093 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Her mobilization travel orders be extended from 7 Oct 13 to 14 Oct 13. This extension should include all pay, benefits, and entitlements. 2. Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect the corrected mobilization end date. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Delays in returning from a deployment required an extension of her mobilization end date. Along with others, she was erroneously overlooked in the processing of an extension. When the request to have her mobilization end date extended was submitted, however, the request was not processed in a timely manner. Efforts to resolve this issue, including an Exception to Policy and a Congressional inquiry, have been unsuccessful. As a result, resolution was recommended through a BCMR application. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving as a member of the Air Force Reserve in the grade of lieutenant colonel (05). According to documentation provided by the applicant, her name is listed on group special mission travel orders, in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, from Alabama to Qatar, and return to Alabama, with a proceed date on/about 7 May 13, for a period of 130 days. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibits B and C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1RR recommends granting relief, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant [and other similarly situated personnel] was mobilized and deployed in support of ongoing operations; unfortunately, due to circumstances beyond her control, the mobilization authority in which she was activated expired prior to her orders being extended. This situation occurred due to personnel not leaving the deployed location when originally scheduled. The majority of these delays were attributed to transportation delays. This left her in a hardship and unable to complete final travel vouchers or receive pay and allowances for the additional days warranted for this activation. It was through no fault of the applicant the request to extend his orders was not approved. Problems with extending orders have not been encountered until mid-to-late August 2013. Around that time, it was determined requests for mobilization extensions could not be processed on personnel whose Partial Mobilization (PM) authority would expire prior to the extension being approved. However, it takes a minimum of 3 weeks to process extension requests of 15 days or more and 10 days to process request less than 15 days. Based on this timeline, any extension request whose PM Message authority has/will expire, would have to be submitted as an Exception to Policy (ETP). They were not aware of this policy (the ETP), nor did they know what was required to submit a request for ETP. After much discussion, and a series of policy memorandums regarding the ETP procedures, it was determined a Board of Correction to Military Records (BCMR) review would be the best course of action [to correct his record] It is recommended to change the applicant’s mobilization end date to 15 Oct 13 (OPR confirmed 15 Oct 13 end date is correct, and that the 14 Jul 15 advisory’s proposed 15 Oct 14 end date was a typo), and to award 14 days downtime and 14 days leave. It is not recommended to award any Post Deployment/Mobilization Respite Absence (PDMRA) days. Additionally, the applicant’s DD Form 214 should also be corrected to reflect the new mobilization end date A complete copy of the AFRC/A1RR evaluation is at Exhibit B. SAF/MRM recommends granting relief, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. SAF/MR granted an ETP allowing Air Reserve Component (ARC) members a Military Personnel Appropriation (MPA) tour to exercise the leave days they were unable to use due to a delay in return from the USAFCENT AOR. The affected members were required to provide justification and all appropriate documentation, to include a completed travel voucher, mobilization and CED orders so as to justify the number of leave days requested. The ETP was necessary because AFI 36-2819 (advisory shows AFI 36-2618-a typo) para 3.3., does not allow additional tours or extensions for the purpose of creating leave. However, the ETP expired 30 Mar 14, which is several months prior to the request made by the applicant. Thus, their only avenue of redress is to request a correction through the BCMR. The lost leave was through no fault of the applicant. A complete copy of the SAF/MRM evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 7 Oct 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant's complete submission, we believe the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice. While we note the comments of AFRC/A1RR indicating relief should be granted because the applicant was unable to use all of the leave she accrued during her deployment in support of OEF, we believe a preponderance of the evidence substantiates that corrective action is not warranted. In this respect, we note the applicant served in an active duty capacity during the period of time immediately following her return from deployment, which prevents the Board from extending the end date of her deployment orders for the purpose of placing her in ordinary leave status. As a result, the accrued leave she was unable to take should have been added to her leave balance, and remained available to her to either sell or take in the future. The applicant has provided no documentation to establish that there is an error in her leave balance or that she inappropriately lost leave. In other words, it appears to the Board that the leave system worked as designed and no error or injustice occurred. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 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-2014-05093 in Executive Session on 22 Jan and 18 Apr 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-05093 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Nov 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Memorandum, AFRC/A1RR, dated 14 Jul 15. Exhibit C. Memorandum, SAF/MRM, dated 22 Sep 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Oct 15. 3 4