Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03214
Original file (BC-2002-03214.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03214
            INDEX CODE:  121.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Nine and a half (9.5) days of leave be  added  to  his  leave  account
commencing 1 October 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon return from a 3-month deployment after an 11-month extension  due
to stop loss, the squadron issued complimentary  non-chargeable  leave
time.  Upon return from this leave time, he was  immediately  assigned
to work.  At that time he started his out-processing to separate.   No
leave is available while out-processing takes place.  As a result,  he
lost 9.5 days of leave.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 10 December 1997.

He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman     (E-4).
He carried a leave balance of 42.5 days in to FY02.  He  only  took  3
days of leave  the  entire  fiscal  year  (24-26  January  2002).   He
deployed to Turkey on 22 May 2002 and returned to his home station  on
29 August 2002.  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.  He applied  for
separation on 16 September 2002,  and  started  terminal  leave  on  5
October 2002.   The  applicant  was  released  from  active  duty  and
transferred to the Air Force Reserve on 9 December 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSFM states that they contacted the applicant and asked  him  to
provide a letter from his commander stating that he was denied  leave.
The applicant stated that  he  was  not  denied  leave.   However,  he
wrongly believed that because he was under  stop  loss,  the  use/lose
rules did not apply.  Therefore,  he  calculated  his  terminal  leave
based on the leave balance shown on the monthly leave balance listing.
 He stated that his local Finance Office later informed  him  that  he
would lose 9.5 days at the end of FY02.  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.  Because he
lost 9.5 days at the end of September he had to change his final  out-
processing date to 5 October 2002.

Air Force  Instruction  36-3003,  Military  Leave  Program,  paragraph
4.1.2. states, “Both management and members  share  responsibility  in
managing  leave  balances  throughout  the  FY  (fiscal  year).”    In
addition, AFI 36-3003, paragraph 4.1.4.2. states, “(Encourage  members
to use leave) after periods of arduous duty and protracted periods  of
deployment.”  There is no provision in  the  AFI  for  non-chargeable,
post-deployment leave, even  though  it  has  become  common  practice
through the USAF.  The applicant failed to properly manage  his  leave
account during FY02.  Therefore, they recommend denial of  applicant’s
request.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with  attachment,  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 13 December 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 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 error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence  of
record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error
or that he has been the victim of an injustice.  His  contentions  are
noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed comments provided by  the
appropriate Air Force offices adequately  address  those  allegations.
Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or  injustice.   In  the
absence of evidence by the applicant indicating he was miscounseled or
that he requested leave and his request was improperly denied, 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 19 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                       Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Oct 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSFM, dated 2 Dec 02, w/atch.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Dec 02.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Vice Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03214

    Original file (BC-2002-03214.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2002-03035

    Original file (BC-2002-03035.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2002-03035

    Original file (BC-2002-03035.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2003-02319

    Original file (BC-2003-02319.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After his return, he took several periods of leave, however, there were three days of leave he was unable to take. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSFM indicates that AFI 36-3003, states in part that members are ineligible for special leave accrual consideration if they returned from deployment and had the opportunity to use leave and failed to do so. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200919

    Original file (0200919.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The two periods of leave should have been time off and not charged as leave. There are commanders that take care of their careers and then there are commanders that want to be good leaders and managers. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-00919 in Executive Session on 18 Jul 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Panel Chair Mr. Mike Novel, Member Ms. Marilyn Thomas,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0101853

    Original file (0101853.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The information he received was incorrect; therefore, he was charged 8 days of excess leave (24-31 Oct 00). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSFM recommends the application be approved. The DFAS- POCC/DE evaluation,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01888

    Original file (BC-2005-01888.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Applicant requests 60 days of leave be restored to his leave account and he be entitled to sell his leave upon his 1 May 2005 retirement. The Air Force has recommended restoring 60 days to the applicant’s leave account. In reviewing the applicant’s MMPA, DFAS determined, however, that the applicant’s account should have reflected 26.5 days of leave at the time of his retirement.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01341

    Original file (BC-2003-01341.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He lost seven and one-half days of leave on 1 October 2002. The applicant was requested by the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility to provide documentation from his commander or supervisor stating he requested leave and the request was denied. Exhibit C. Letters, SAF/MRBR dated 19 Sep 03.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00642

    Original file (BC-2003-00642.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00642 INDEX NUMBER: 121.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement date be changed from 1 Feb 03 to 1 May 03 in order to use the 68 days of leave he had accrued. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRRP recommends that the applicant be paid...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01027

    Original file (BC-2012-01027.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01027 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Eight (8) days of leave be restored to his leave account. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air...