Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02092
Original file (BC-2004-02092.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02092
            INDEX NUMBER:  123.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive all pay and allowances for the period he was assessed  lost
time due to his incarceration by civilian authorities.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was wrongfully incarcerated as evidenced by all charges against him
being dropped.  In support of his appeal he provides  a  copy  of  the
motion to dismiss.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 9 Jul 02 and  is
presently serving in the grade of airman first class (A1C).  According
to information in the personnel data system, he was arrested on 5  Aug
03 by civilian authorities in Arizona and extradited to Texas to  face
a charge of child molestation.  He was placed in  confinement  from  6
Aug 03 to 29 Aug 03 when he was released on  bond.   He  was  arrested
again on 30 Sep 03, this time for possession of cocaine.  He  remained
in confinement until    22 Dec  03.   The  charges  against  him  were
eventually dismissed.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/JA  does  not  make  a  specific  recommendation.   They   cannot
determine  from  the  available  information  whether  the   applicant
actually committed either or both of the charged  offenses.   However,
based on 10 U.S.C. Section 972(a)(3), the Air Force  did  not  err  in
characterizing the time the applicant spent  in  confinement  as  lost
time since the statute provides no  exceptions  for  enlisted  members
confined by military or civilian authorities for more than one day  in
conjunction with a trial.  Applying the plain meaning of the  statute,
however, can potentially create an inequity or injustice for those not
convicted of the offense initially charged.  Such may be the case with
the applicant.  The charges against him were dropped due to a lack  of
evidence.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3
Sep 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has
not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant to the Board’s request, DFAS-POCC/DE prepared  an  additional
advisory.  They make no recommendation but confirm applicant would not
have been entitled to pay and allowances while in civil confinement.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 9 Nov 04 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date,
a response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   AFPC/JA  notes  the  evidence
clearly supports the applicant’s contention he  was  not  prosecuted
for the crimes alleged against him.   In  accordance  with  the  DoD
Financial Management Regulation (DoDFMR), Vol 7A, Table  1-12,  Rule
5, a member is entitled to  otherwise  proper  credits  of  pay  and
allowances when confined by civil authorities when  the  absence  is
excused as unavoidable.  According to the DoDFMR, Vol 7A, Table   1-
13, Rule 2, an absence is excused as unavoidable when  it  is  clear
that arrest and detention were not due to member’s  misconduct.   In
this case, the evidence of record does not indicate  what  part,  if
any, the applicant’s conduct contributed to his  arrest.   As  such,
since all charges against him were subsequently dropped, we  believe
he should be given the benefit of the doubt and his absence  excused
as unavoidable, which would entitle him to pay and allowances during
his confinement.  Therefore to avoid a  possible  injustice  to  the
applicant, we recommend his record 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 competent authority
determined his absence due to confinement by civil authorities  from
6 August 2003 to 27 December 2003 was  excused  as  unavoidable  and
that he is entitled to all pay and allowances for this period.

__________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-
02092 in Executive Session on 15 December 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
      Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member

All members voted to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Jun 04, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 9 Aug 04.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 04.
     Exhibit E.  Memorandum, DFAS-POCC/DE, dated 3 Nov 04.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9 Nov 04.




                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN, III
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2004-02092


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. XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that
competent authority determined his absence due to confinement by
civil authorities from 6 August 2003 to 27 December 2003 was
excused as unavoidable and that he is entitled to all pay and
allowances for this period.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00412

    Original file (BC-2004-00412.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the BOI found he had committed the other offenses and recommended the applicant receive a general discharge from the Air Force. He had seven days time lost due to civilian confinement. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/JA recommends the applicant’s requests be denied.

  • 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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-02554

    Original file (BC-2004-02554.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 Sep 03, the applicant was disenrolled from the AFROTC program for failure to maintain military retention standards (making a statement regarding his homosexuality) and breach of his AFROTC contract (withdrawing from school). He indicates in the letter he was disenrolled from AFROTC “when my commander found out that I’m homosexual.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFOATS/JA recommends denial of the applicant’s request. He does...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2000-03245

    Original file (BC-2000-03245.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication that the applicant was forced to take advance leave with pay prior to entering the Air Force Academy as a basic cadet. Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Chief Pay Services, HQ USAFA/FMFC, reviewed the application and states that cadets receive advance pay for clothing and equipment purchases. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02041

    Original file (BC-2004-02041.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02041 INDEX NUMBER: 110.00 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His dismissal from the Air Force be upgraded to honorable. c. On 17 Dec 85, the applicant submitted a resignation in lieu of court-martial (RILO) request. On 13 Aug 87, the Secretary of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03479

    Original file (BC-2002-03479.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    They were throwing beer bottles out of the car window into a trash can and a bottle went through a hotel window. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2001-00404A

    Original file (BC-2001-00404A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a letter to her Congressman, applicant contends a federal judge ruled in Dec 03 the order to take the anthrax vaccine was illegal (Exhibit G). Additionally, we note that litigation concerning the anthrax vaccination program is still pending and that additional rulings have been made since the one referenced by the applicant that the order to take the anthrax vaccination was illegal. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02944

    Original file (BC-2004-02944.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    __________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPO recommends the applicant be granted promotion consideration by SSB with the MSM (5OLC) included in his OSR and annotated on his officer selection brief (OSB). Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below. It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the grade of colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY03B (27 October 2003)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03246

    Original file (BC-2004-03246.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/JA also recommends denial of the applicant’s request. The applicant opines that since the withholding was a discretionary action, he believes it appropriate to discuss the necessity of the action taken by his commander in light of his exemplary record up to the time the action was taken. He states the discretionary action was not required by the circumstances.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03465

    Original file (BC-2001-03465.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW recommends denial of the applicant’s request to restore his time lost. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB recommends that the applicant’s date of rank (DOR) to both A1C and SrA be adjusted accordingly if his request to restore lost time is granted. In view of the above findings we recommend the lost time be removed from applicant’s records.