RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02488
INDEX CODE: 121.00, 121.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS:
Restoration of 17 days of leave charged during a Permanent Change of
Station (PCS) to Ramstein Air Base, Germany.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was placed on convalescent leave after the birth of her daughter
and was allowed to out-process for her PCS assignment without being
told her convalescent leave would end upon out-processing. She feels
she was given wrong advice/counseling concerning this matter.
She gave birth to her daughter on 11 Dec 04 and began her six weeks of
convalescent leave on 14 December 2003 through 25 January 2004 (42
days). She out-processed on 9 January 2004 and her port-call was on 9
February 2004. Upon filing her travel voucher at Ramstein AB, she was
informed that she could not take convalescent leave in conjunction
with a PCS. She was afforded 25 days of convalescent leave and
charged the remaining 17 days as ordinary leave.
In support of her request, the applicant submits a personal statement,
a statement from her commander and additional documents associated
with the issues cited in his contentions. The applicant’s complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is
29 July 1998. She was progressively promoted to the grade of staff
sergeant (E-5), with an effective date and date of rank of 1 January
2003. Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System
(MilPDS) reflects 11 February 2004 as the date she arrived at station
(DAS).
Information extracted from applicant’s submission reveals she was
approved convalescent leave from 14 December 2003 to 14 January 2004.
Applicant’s PCS orders (AF Form 899) reflect her new assignment
(Ramstein AB) reporting date as not later than (NLT) 15 February 2004.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPF recommends the applicant’s request be partially approved.
DPF recommends restoring 16 days of leave based on the commander’s e-
mail the applicant provided indicating it was his intention she
receive the entire period of convalescent leave, 42 days. The
applicant received 26 days of convalescent leave prior to departing
PCS and should have received the additional 16 days of convalescent
leave. The HQ AFPC/DPF evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 3
September 2004 for review and response. As of this date, no response
has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
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. After reviewing the applicant’s
submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that relief is
warranted. In this respect, we are in agreement with the opinion and
recommendation of the appropriate Air Force office, HQ AFPC/DPF, that
the evidence supports restoration of 16 days of leave to the
applicant’s records. We considered applicant’s request for 17 days of
leave; however, since she was only authorized an additional 16 days of
convalescent leave, we do not recommend approval of the additional
day. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the applicant’s records
be corrected to the extent 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 16 days of leave were
added to her leave account commencing 2 October 2004.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 28 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member
Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered in connection with
AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-02488.
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Aug 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPF, dated 30 Aug 04, w/atch.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 04.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2004-02488
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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that 16 days of leave
were added to her leave account commencing 2 October 2004.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03187
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPF recommends denial. DPF explains AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, note below para 10.9.7, states, in part, a member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01648
Because of his disenrollment from OTS, his line number was removed and not reinstated. Even though the loss of this selection based on his entry into OTS prior to the time the promotion would have been incremented was proper and in accordance with the governing directive, we believe, based on the circumstances in this case, the earlier selection for promotion should be restored. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 May 04, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00288
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She received an assignment notification to Incirlik ABS, Turkey, and was advised that she would have to extend for 14 months to obtain retainability for this assignment. On 15 August 2003 the applicant reenlisted in the United States Air Force for a period of 4 years and 18 months. DPPAE’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03234
According to AFPC/DPF, no evidence was provided by the applicant showing he was denied leave, and he did not provide any proof his loss of leave was a result of an error or injustice by the Air Force. In their view, the applicant was given ample time between the time he made his intentions to separate known on 29 Jul 04 and when the assignment was changed to Peterson AFB on 16 Aug 04 to apply for separation and take leave prior to 1 Oct 04. As of this date, no response has been received by...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03621
An additional 30 days of convalescent leave was requested on 18 August 2005, so that he could rehabilitate at his home of record. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPF recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claim. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 06.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04402
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04402 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 32 days of advance leave she was charged while on leave in in Shreveport, LA be restored. The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02693
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to AFI 36-2606, paragraph 2.8., to be eligible for a Zone C SRB, airmen must complete at least 10 but no more than 14 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS) (including current enlistment and periods of active duty) on the date of reenlistment or beginning an extension of enlistment; reenlist or extend their enlistments (in one increment) in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) for at...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01302
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01302 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 27 days of leave she lost at the end of fiscal year (FY) 2011 be restored. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was unable to use 27 days of leave due to her being deployed in support of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02678
On 7 Mar 03, she was placed on a deferment due to a medical condition; as a result, the Feb 03 weight was excused. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant asserts the medical deferment expired in Jun 03 without a firm diagnosis being given. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 04.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03548
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPF reviewed this application and recommended denial, stating, in part, AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, para 10.9.7, states member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the applicant’s lost leave. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...