RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03035
INDEX CODE: 128.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Twenty (20) days of leave be added to his current leave balance.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He lost leave due to his Professional Military Education (PME) duties and
responsibilities at his new duty station in Australia.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a statement from the U.S.
Embassy, Canberra, ACT, dated 16 September 2002.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of
lieutenant colonel.
The applicant lost 20 days of leave at the end of Fiscal Year 2002 (FY02).
The applicant was charged seven (7) days of leave (25 through 31 October
2001) and three (3) days of leave (25-27 November 2001) with no other leave
charged for the remainder of FY02.
On 9 December 2001 the applicant arrived at his current duty station.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSFM recommended denial. They indicated that they emailed the
applicant and asked him for a letter from his commander stating that he was
denied or unable to take leave. The applicant responded by return email
that he started teaching in late January 2002, and classes run until mid
December 2002 with no opportunity to take leave. The applicant is
disappointed that his word isn’t good enough and that he needs another
Lieutenant Colonel to sign a letter. AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program,
paragraph 4.1.2., Annual Leave Program, puts the responsibility for
managing leave balances on both management and the member. The applicant
used 10 days of leave between 1 October 2001 and his arrival at his new
duty station on 9 December 2001. He states in his email that he received a
permanent change of station (PCS) on short notice. The applicant spent the
Christmas holidays in a hotel while he looked for a car, a place to live
and waited on Customs officials to return from the holidays in the middle
of January. None of this time was charged to the applicant as leave. The
applicant refused to provide a letter from his commander stating that leave
had been denied or that he was unable to take leave due to his duty
schedule. Additionally, it appears that he had approximately 6 weeks,
arrived 9 December 2001 started teaching late January 2002, in which he
could have used leave.
The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 13 December 2002, a copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days. 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 probable error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the
evidence of record, we are not persuaded that 20 days should be restored to
applicant's leave account. The applicant contends that he lost leave due
to his Professional Military Education (PME) duties and responsibilities at
his new duty station in Australia. According to the applicant’s Master
Military Pay Account (MMPA) he carried forward 60 days of leave at the end
of FY 01. He was charged 7 days of leave 25-31 October 2001 and 3 days of
leave 25-27 November 2001 with no other leave charged for the remainder of
FY 02. The applicant arrived at his new duty station on 9 December 2001
and reported for work in late January 2002. The Board is of the opinion
that the applicant had ample time in which to use his leave. In fact, it
appears that he was not charged for any leave from the time he arrived at
his new duty station until he commenced work, a period of approximately six
weeks. He was advised by AFPC/DPSFM to provide a statement from his
commander stating that he was denied or was unable to take leave due to his
duty schedule. He chose not to do so. 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-03035
in Executive Session on 20 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Mary J. Johnson, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 September 2002, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSFM, dated 2 December 2002,
w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 December 2002.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03035
In fact, it appears that he was not charged for any leave from the time he arrived at his new duty station until he commenced work, a period of approximately six weeks. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSFM, dated 2 December 2002, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 December 2002.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03214
The applicant had a leave balance of 69.5 days at the end of FY02, and lost 9.5 days of leave at that time. The applicant stated in an email that he intended to out-process at the end of September, take 70 days of terminal leave, and sell 5.5 days upon separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03214
The applicant had a leave balance of 69.5 days at the end of FY02, and lost 9.5 days of leave at that time. The applicant stated in an email that he intended to out-process at the end of September, take 70 days of terminal leave, and sell 5.5 days upon separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02107
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Because he applied for a Stop Loss waiver that was approved, he did not have enough time before his retirement date to use 10 remaining days of leave on his account. DPPRRP notes that the applicant only had 2 days from his Stop Loss waiver approval to his effective retirement date but states that the applicant had the opportunity to extend his retirement effective date up to 30 days and neglected to...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02544
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) informally advised that applicant’s leave balance upon departing on Permanent Change of Station (PCS) was 14.5 days; he was charged 29 days leave upon reporting to his new duty station at Mountain Home AFB. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSFM recommends denial and states that applicant was not considered Present for Duty, TDY, PTDY or in an enroute status for the stated period. In...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02922
When he out-processed on 31 December 2002, the leave still had not been restored to his account and he was told that he would need to submit an application to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) to have the leave restored. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSFM states that paragraph 10.9.7 of the AFI 36-3003, states in part a member’s application for correction of military records must clearly establish...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03627
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2002-03627 INDEX CODE 123.01 123.08 121/03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be cleared of deserter status, the 29 Aug-5 Sep 02 period of lost time be changed to hospitalization, and he be paid for 9.5 days of lost leave and two days (16-17 Oct 02) of work. In retrospect, it is...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00855
The DPSFM evaluation is at Exhibit B. While on convalescent leave, the applicant went to the Bahamas for four days. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jun 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-03436
On 21 February 2003, the applicant applied for ten days of PTDY from 25 February to 6 March 2003 and for Terminal Leave from 7 March to 18 May 2003 and the leave was approved as evidenced by AF Form 988’s. Her original request for PTDY and Terminal Leave were on separate AF Form 988’s for ten days PTDY (leave approved by the commander but not debited against the leave account) from 25 February to 6 March 2003, and for 73 days of Terminal Leave from 7 March to 18 May 2003. After careful...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02333
DPSFM states that the applicant began FY03 with 47 days of leave and would have accrued 17.5 days of leave by his retirement date of 30 April 2003 for a total balance of 64.5 available days of leave. Therefore the government is owed for the 5.5 days of extra leave the applicant took as part of his terminal leave. 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...