RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03907
INDEX NUMBER: 121.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The five days of leave charged for the period 12 through 16 Nov 02 be
restored.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He advised his recruiter before his EAD orders were cut that he could
not report before 18 Nov 02 due to his having to get current ACLS
certification, which he needed to practice as an Air Force physician.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a physician serving on active duty in the grade of
major. He was ordered to extended active duty (EAD) via Special Order
AH-----, dated 5 Nov 02, with an EAD date of 8 Nov 02. The applicant
was given four travel days and had a report not later than date
(RNLTD) of not later than 2400 hours on 11 Nov 02. The applicant
reported for duty on 17 Nov 02. The applicant was charged five days
of leave from 12-16 Nov 02.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPAMF2 recommends denial of the applicant’s request.
Applicant’s EAD order was published on 5 Nov 02 and provided to
applicant by mail. The EAD order indicated that the applicant was to
report not later than 11 Nov 02. Applicant contacted his recruiter
rather than the office that published the orders to request a later
reporting date. There is no statement that shows the recruiter
concurred with the applicant’s request. The EAD order specifies
contacting AFPC/DPAMF for any issues prior to departing. In addition,
a fact sheet was provided to applicant with instructions under
reporting data that indicates, “Always follow these instructions
closely as they can affect pay and entitlements.” The Medical
Accessions Program Manager was not contacted by the applicant or
recruiter regarding the request.
The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant responded by stating that it appears his appeal has been
misunderstood. He told his recruiter before his orders were issued
that he would be attending ACLS certification on 13 Nov 02 and would
not be able to report to Lackland Air Force Base before 17 Nov 02.
His message was somehow not relayed. He now knows that he should have
reported and had the Air Force pay for his ACLS certification. He
would not have been able to work since his ALCS certification had
expired. He is only asking not to be charged leave since he told
those that needed to know that he could not make it before 17 Nov 02.
The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.
Pursuant to the Board’s request, the applicant provided information on
when he reported for active duty and how much leave he was charged.
Applicant did not have a copy of his travel voucher, but provided a
copy of his travel voucher summary.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
G.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. The Board finds it reasonable that
the applicant may have contacted his recruiter rather than following
the instructions provided to him with his EAD orders. We also note
that the applicant delayed his reporting to receive training necessary
to perform his duties as an Air Force physician. Although we have
determined that the applicant could have waited and received the
training after he reported for active duty, it appears that his
actions were motivated by a desire to report for duty with all the
necessary credentials. As such, after reviewing the complete
circumstances of his case, we believe that charging the applicant
leave could be perceived as an injustice. Therefore, we recommend
that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that during the period 12
through 16 November 2002, he was in a duty status rather than ordinary
leave status.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2002-
03907 in Executive Session on 21 May 2003, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Panel Chair
Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Member
Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Dec 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPAMF2, dated 23 Jan 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Jan 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Apr 03.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.
THOMAS J. TOPOLSKI
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2002-03907
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show that
during the period 12 through 16 November 2002, he was in a duty status
rather than ordinary leave status.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01900 INDEX CODE: 100 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His extended active duty (EAD) date be changed from 16 Mar 98 to 15 Mar 98 to allow him to request supplemental board consideration for promotion to the grade of captain. If his EAD was 15 Mar 98 instead of 16 Mar 98, he could request to...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02895
DPAMF2 states it might have been understandable if the applicant was entering AD service for the first time, but notes she served on active duty in the Air Force from 1999-2005 and met the major's promotion board. The applicant has a complete record of performance that will be reviewed by central board members. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR BC-2007-02895 MEMORANDUM FOR CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00003 INDEX NUMBER: 113.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His extended active duty date (EAD) be changed from 26 May 01 to 24 May 01. The Traffic Management Office at Hill and Mountain Home Air Force Bases allowed early travel. We took notice of the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01782
The AFPC/DPPAEQ evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he requested a DD Form 215 with the correct discharge date from the Marine Corps; however, his request was refused. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00603
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00603 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) to first lieutenant be adjusted from 4 July 2002 to 4 April 2001. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAMF2 states that the applicant completed his Master’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03931
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03931 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The duty title on his Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for the period 17 May 01 through 16 May 02, be corrected to read “Bioenvironmental Engineering Flight Commander” rather than “Bioenvironmental Engineer”; and, that he...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force, on 22 Jan 98 and voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on 24 Feb 98. In DPAMF2’s view, the credit is correctly stated, since he was not employed full time for a minimum of six months prior to taking an oath of office in the Reserve of the Air Force. TERRY A. YONKERS Panel Chair AFBCMR 98-01877 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...
The applicant’s initial USUHS contract would govern any ADSC associated with educational programs regardless of the time he actually enters training. DPAME also noted that current and past regulatory guidance is that obligation for civilian sponsorship is always served consecutively to any pre-existing ADSC. Actually, the regulation he was provided did indicate a consecutive obligation for civilian sponsored training, although his ADSC is governed by the language in his contract.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02954
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02954 INDEX NUMBER: 113.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His extended active duty (EAD) order, Special Order A-2009, dated 1 May 02, be amended to change his effective date of duty from 17 Jun 02 to 16 Jun 02. The Board notes that although the applicant...
This rule basically states that he didn’t come back on active duty as an officer until he began traveling to his next duty assignment. He didn’t travel until 5 June 1998, and they set his commissioning DOR between the date he separated from enlisted status and the date he began traveling as an officer. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, the majority of the Board is persuaded that the applicant’s commission date of rank should be changed.