RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  00-03210
                 INDEX CODE:  128.00
                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Board make an “affirmation of monies” owed  and  to  correct  a  “false
categorization.”
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DD  Form  785,  Record  of  Disenrollment  from  Officer  Candidate-Type
Training, states that he owes $1680.00 in sustenance paid. However,  he  was
informed that his account payable balance is larger than the figure  stated.
 Statements on AFROTC Form 22, Cadet Personnel Action Request,  are  harmful
and a false representation of his credibility.

In support of his application, he submits a personal  statement  and  copies
of DD Form 785 dated 1 Sept 99 and AFROTC Form 22 dated 24 Aug  99  (Exhibit
A).
___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared  by  the
appropriate office of the Air Force.   Accordingly,  there  is  no  need  to
recite these facts in this record of proceedings.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Deputy Staff Judge Advocate, AFOATS/JA, states that the purpose  of  the
DD Form 785 is for all  military  services  to  exchange  information  on  a
person who was previously disenrolled from  an  officer  candidate  training
program in any service and who later applies to another program.   The  form
is not used to indicate the amount of money  (if  any)  that  a  disenrolled
trainee must repay.  On the applicant’s Receipt  of  Notification  (RON)  of
Disenrollment Action there is an accounting of the monies  received  by  the
applicant.  The document references the $1680.00 for  subsistence,  as  well
as the $1700.00 for tuition and $300.00  for  books.   The  government  only
recoups education  expenses  (i.e.  books  and  tuition)  if  recoupment  is
ordered following  disenrollment.   The  RON  also  states  that  the  final
determination of the amount of monies paid will be made  by  AFROTC/FM.   In
short, the dollar amount listed on  the  DD  Form  785  is  not  the  amount
subject to recoupment.  The applicant’s account payable  balance  is  larger
than the amount noted on the DD Form 785 because he received more money  for
education expenses that  he  did  for  subsistence.   The  amount  of  money
subject to recoupment is not recorded on the DD Form 785.

JA  states  that  the  applicant  underlined  two  statements  made  by  the
detachment commander on AFROTC Form 22 that he contends are “harmful  to  my
credibility and a false representation of me.”  The statements  in  question
do not pertain to the applicant’s credibility.  The  remarks  focus  on  his
effort, or more accurately, his lack of effort in the  AFROTC  program.   In
that context, the remarks  are  not  inappropriate.   It  is  important  for
detachment commander’s remarks on  the  form  to  be  honest  and  candid  -
otherwise; they provide no special insight into a  cadet’s  performance  and
potential.

JA indicates that in this case the  detachment  commander  used  the  AFROTC
Form 22 to request that the applicant be disenrolled and  he  added  remarks
that justified his request in Block 25 where the  remarks  in  question  are
located.  The remarks are not a  record  of  a  final  decision.   They  are
simply the mechanism for the unit commander to offer insight, often  in  the
form of his or her opinion of the cadet’s performance and  potential,  which
are factors that are considered by HQ  AFROTC  in  making  force  management
decisions.  The form is not a publicly available record  nor  is  it  widely
distributed.  It is sent by the detachment to HQ  AFROTC,  and  reviewed  by
headquarters personnel who manage cadet personnel actions.  The AFROTC  Form
22 is maintained with the disenrollment case file  for  three  years  by  HQ
AFROTC/RRFD, and then destroyed.  The applicant's  disenrollment  case  file
is scheduled for destruction in calendar year 2002.

JA states that the  applicant  has  not  submitted  sufficient  evidence  of
probable material error or injustice to warrant any action by the board  and
indicates the request is without merit and recommends denial (Exhibit C).

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  Evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and response.  As of this date, this office has received no  response
(Exhibit E).

___________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest  of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  probable  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 and adopt  their  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  We agree with AFOATS/JA that the Receipt of  Notification  (RON)
of Disenrollment Action, DD Form 785, is not used to indicate the amount  of
monies  subject  to  recoupment  by  AFROTC/FM,  but  is  used  to  exchange
information between  services  on  a  person  disenrolled  from  an  officer
candidate training program.   Furthermore,  we  are  not  persuaded  by  the
evidence presented  that  the  statements  on  the  AFROTC  Form  22,  Cadet
Personnel Action Request, are harmful  or  a  false  representation  of  his
credibility, but are the detachment commander’s opinion of  the  applicant's
performance and potential as a cadet in the AFROTC Program.   Therefore,  in
the absence of evidence to the contrary, we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

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 11 September 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Panel Chair
      Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member
      Mr. Christopher Carey, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 May 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFOATS/JA, dated 1 Jul 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 20 Jul 01.




                                   PEGGY E. GORDON
                                   Panel Chair