. 

ADDENDUM TO 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  96-03761 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

FEB  19 l9@' 

APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT : 
He be  provided  entitlements for a  family separation allowance, 
educational  benefits,  participation  in  the  Montgomery  GI  Bill 
program, and early retirement. 

He receive backpay and allowances and accrued leave as a result 
of his original General Court Martial sentence being set aside. 

RESUME OF CASE: 
On  10 March  1998, the Board considered and  recommended partial 
approval of applicant's request f o r   promotion.  On 25 March 1998, 
the  Deputy  for  Air  Force  Review  Boards  directed  that  he  be 
provided  supplemental  promotion  consideration  to  the  grade  of 
staff sergeant  f o r   all  appropriate  cycles beginning  with  Cycle 
93A5.  A  copy of the Record of Proceedings (ROP) is at Exhibit I. 
Further research with HQ AFPC/DPPPWB indicated that the applicant 
was  supplementally considered and  nonselected  for promotion  to 
the grade of staff sergeant f o r   cycles 93A5 through 9535. 

APPL ICANT CONTE NDS THAT: 
His appellate  (excess) leave should be for the period 10 Apr  92 
through  7 Jan  96  instead  of  10 Apr  92 through  31 Dec  9 4 .  
A 
waiver  should be  granted  for use  of  a  W-2  f o r   computation of 
backpay. 
His accrued leave  should be  restored for the period  10 Apr  92 
through  7 Jan 96.  If  this request  is approved, he  requests a 
waiver to maintain a balance in excess of 6 0   days and the option 
to use the leave as terminal leave or regular leave.  He remains 
in a  constant negative  leave balance  and  has used  many  of  the 
advanced  leave  days  to  retrieve  information  necessary  f o r  
reprocessing to active duty. 
He  be  permitted  access  to  the  Tuition  Assistance  Program  and 
other educational benefits f o r   a period of  4 years and  6 months 

after his date of  separation.  Continued access to the Tuition 
Assistance  Program  and  other  educational  benefits  after  his’ 
separation  should be  for  the  same  period  of  time  that  he  was 
denied the opportunity to utilize the 75% benefit afforded those 
on active duty. 

He be  permitted  to utilize his  former Air  Force Specialty Code 
(AFSC) for enrollment in the Community College of the Air Force, 
and that he should be granted the opportunity to participate in 
the  Montgomery  GI  Bill  Program. 
He  was  informed  that 
nonperformance  in  an  AFSC  for  5  years  prevents  its  use  for 
additional credits with the community college. 

He be provided the opportunity to utilize any government program 
offered  to personnel  formerly stationed at  Norton AFB  or March 
AFB.  Specifically, he is interested in the government purchasing 
his home in San Bernardino, CA.  With the closure of March AFB, 
and since his reassignment to McChord AFB, WA, some assistance in 
selling his home in CA would be very beneficial. 
He be authorized payment of Family Separation Allowance  (FSA) due 
to the  short notice he  received  to  report  to McChord  AFB, WA, 
leaving his family in CA.  Although he resides in a dormitory at 
McChord AFB, he essentially maintains two separate households, 

He be permitted to retire earlier than 20 years without penalty. 
He  is  approximately  18  months  away  from  a  20  year  date  of 
separation  and  does  not  wish  to  lose  benefits,  pay  or 
entitlements. 
In support of his application, he provided a personal  statement 
and copies of documents associated with the issues cited in his 
contentions (see Exhibit G )  . 

AIR FOR CE EVALUATION: 
The  Chief,  Voluntary  Education  Programs, HQ  USAF/DPPE,  stated 
that  the  Tuition  Assistance  Program  can  be  used  by  enlisted 
personnel while on active duty  from the date of entry through the 
date of discharge.  Tuition assistance has never been authorized 
while on appellate leave.  As to the Montgomery GI Bill benefits, 
DPPE  stated  that  enrollment  takes  place  when  a  member  enters 
active duty.  Enrollment is not  retroactive.  Entry into either 
the  Veterans  Education  Assistance  Program  (VEAP)  or  the 
Montgomery  GI Bill  (MGIB) program  is voluntary  at  the  time  of 
entry on active duty not at a later date.  The applicant is not 
eligible for a GI B i l l   program unless new legislation is passed 
allowing those not enrolled a second opportunity.  With regard to 
utilizing previous Air Force Specialty Codes  (AFSC), DPPE stated 
that if the applicant wants to enroll in a previously held AFSC, 
which  he  no  longer  has  through  no  fault  of  his  own,  he  can 
request a waiver through the Dean, Community College of  the Air 
Force (Exhibit J). 

2 

9 6 - 0 3 7 6 1  

The  Chief,  Military  Compensation  &  Legislation  Division,  HQ' 
USAF/DPPC,  stated  that  Title-  37,  U.S.C.,  Section  427,  only 
authorizes  Family Separation Allowance  (FSA) for members  whose 
dependents  are  denied  movement  to  their  new  permanent  duty 
station  or  a  place  near  that  station  is  not  authorized  at 
government expense.  The applicant, for personal reasons, decided 
not  to  relocate  his  dependents  to  his  new  permanent  duty 
location.  The circumstances stated do not authorize payment  of 
FSA.  Regarding  the  applicant's  inquiries about  the  government 
purchasing  his  home,  DPPC  stated  that  he  may  be  eligible  for 
benefits  under  the  Homeowner  Assistance  Program  (HAP).  HAP 
eligibility  is  based  on  the  termination  date  of  a  member's 
service at a military installation which will be or was closed or 
realigned under the Base Realignment and Closure  (BRAC) program. 
Since Norton  AFB,  CA, was  closed  under  the  BRAC  program,  the 
applicant  may  be  eligible  for  these  benefits.  DPPC  indicated 
that the applicant should contact the U.S. Army Engineer District 
for further information (Exhibit K). 
The  Chief,  Retirements  Branch,  HQ  AFPC/DPPRR,  stated  that  the 
applicant's  high  year of  tenure  is  9  March  1999,  20  years  of 
active  service,  which  will  give  him  a  retirement  with  full 
benefits,  retirement  pay,  and  entitlements  effective  1 April 
1999.  Based on his date of separation (DOS) of 18 February 1999, 
the applicant will need to extend two months to reach retirement. 
After  carefully  reviewing  applicant's  package  and  personnel 
records, along with  the  applicable  laws and  regulations, DPPRR 
does not find where an error or injustice took place which would 
warrant  an approval of early retirement.  Applicant s  case does 
not  meet  the  established  criteria, which  must  be  consistently 
applied  in order to ensure  fairness for all Air  Force members. 
DPPRR stated that the enlisted early retirement program was last 
available until 30 October 1996, when the program closed.  Since 
this program  has been  successful over  the  fiscal years to meet 
enlisted  end-strengths, it  has  not  been  necessary  over  recent 
fiscal years.  DPPRR  recommended applicant's  request  be  denied 
(Exhibit L). 
The Chief,  Claims Branch, DFAS-DE/FYCC, stated that the applicant 
has not  provided  the  requested civilian earning  statements for 
the period  10 April  1992 through 31 December 1994  in order for 
DFAS-DE to process  his claim  for backpay.  FYCC indicated that 
the requirement f o r   offset of civilian earnings is in accordance 
with  Department  of  Defense  Financial  Management  Regulation. 
Until the applicant provides the requested information, his claim 
for backpay cannot be  considered.  As  to the  applicant's  leave 
account, it will be  reconstructed when he provides the required 
civilian earnings information.  The entitlement to leave and the 
accumulation  of  leave  is  set  forth  in  10  U.S.C.  701,  which 
stipulates that a member may not accumulate more than 60 days of 
leave.  Due  to  this  statutory  leave  limitation, all  days  of 
accrued  leave  in  excess  of  6 0   days  will  be  immediately  lost 
effective 30 September before the fiscal year in which his leave 

3 

9 6 - 0 3 7 6 1  

account will be reconstructed,  The leave may not be credited in 
the fiscal year of  his  leave reconstruction to avoid  the  loss.' 
FYCC  stated  that  the  applicant's  military  pay  account  shows  a 
projected separation date of  18 February 1999.  He has not sold 
any accrued leave  in his military  career and  could possibly be 
due  a settlement of  60 days  of  accrued  leave depending on his 
usage  of  accrued  leave  and  the  reconstruction  of  his  leave 
account  (Exhibit M) . 
Through further research, DFAS-DE/FYCC indicated that  they have 
just recently received the required documents from the applicant 
and  are  in  the  process  of  working  his  claim  for  backpay  and 
leave. 

APPLICANT'S REVIE W OF AIR FORCE  EV ALUATION : 
Copies of  the Air Force evaluations were  forwarded to applicant 
on 15 June 1998 and 6 August 1998 for review and response.  As of 
this  date,  no  response  has  been  received  by  this  office 
(Exhibit N) . 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 

1. 
law or regulations. 
2.  The application was timely filed. 
3 .   Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of probable injustice.  We  took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
Inasmuch  as  DFAS-DE  is  currently  processing  the 
the  case. 
applicant's  claim  for backpay  and  leave, we  find this  to be  a 
moot  issue. 
The  applicant's  contentions  concerning  his 
entitlements  for  educational  benefits,  participation  in  the 
Montgomery GI Bill program, family separation allowance and early 
retirement  are  duly  noted;  however,  we  do  not  find  these 
assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,  sufficiently  persuasive  to 
override  the  rationale  provided  by  the  respective  Air  Force 
off ices 
We  therefore  agree  with  the  opinions  and 
recommendations of the appropriate Air Force off ices of primary 
responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for 
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an 
injustice.  As  to the applicant utilizing his  former Air  Force 
Specialty Code  (AFSC) for enrollment in the Community College of 
the Air Force and benefits under the Homeowner Assistance Program 
(HAP) ,  we  note  that  the  respective  Air  Force  offices  have 
provided applicant the names of the offices he needs to contact 
concerning these issues.  In view of  the  foregoing, we  find no 
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

4 

9 6 - 0 3 7 6 1  

I 

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  issue(s) 
involved.  Therefore, the request f o r   a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

The  applicant be  notified  that  the  evidence presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  material  error  or 
injustice;  that  the  application  was  denied  without  a personal 
appearance; and  that  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 this application in 
Executive Session on 6  October 1998, under the provisions of AFI 
3 6 - 2 6 0 3  : 

Mr. Michael P. Higgins, 
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member 
-~ Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member 

Panel Chair 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit I. 
Exhibit J. 
Exhibit K. 
Exhibit L. 
Exhibit M. 
Exhibit N. 

Record of Proceedings, dated 2 5   Mar 98, w/atclls. 
Letter, HQ USAF/DPPE, dated 11 May 98. 
Letter, HQ USAF/DPPC, dated 2 2   May 98. 
Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRR, dated 29 May 98. 
Letter, DFAS-DE/FYCC, dated 4 Aug 98, w/atchs. 
Letters, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Jun 98 and 6 Aug 98. 

Panel Chair 

5 

96-03761