RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01394
INDEX CODE: 121.03
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 Oct 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be changed to reflect he was not paid a total of 44 days
of accrued leave as of 14 Nov 00, and that he be paid for 14 days of
leave he accrued at the end of his recent extended active duty (EAD)
tour on 14 Apr 05.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In his Reserve and active duty career, he has not sold back that many
cumulative leave days at the end of all previous active duty tours.
The record indicated that he was paid for a total of 44 days on/about
14 Nov 00, which would mean he would have to have been on a continuous
active duty status for the 18 months leading up to that date and not
have taken any leave during the entire period to have accrued a total
of 44 days.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is an Air Force Reserve captain who recently served on
active duty as an intelligence operations specialist from 8 Mar to
1 Jul 00. Based on source documents provided by HQ AFRC/FMFQ, the
applicant sold the following days of leave:
Pay Date Leave Sold Duty Location
3/08/00 1.5 Maxwell AFB
7/17/00 3.5 Maxwell AFB
11/01/00 4 Maxwell AFB
7/07/99 6 Maxwell AFB
7/31/98 2.5 Charleston AFB
1/24/96 5.5 Keesler AFB
4/15/96 .5 Keesler AFB
10/11/95 1.5 Keesler AFB
5/05/95 4 Keesler AFB
3/17/95 3.5 Keesler AFB
In addition to the 32.5 days above, the applicant sold 11.5 days
between 1 Mar 93 and 16 Aug 94, for a total of 44 days of leave.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFRC/FMFQ indicates that original source documents received from
the applicant’s unit of assignments indicate a total of 44 days of
accrued leave were sold. This leave was sold in small increments from
Mar 93 through Dec 00. Based on this finding, they recommend the
applicant’s request be denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 26 Aug 05 for review and comment within 30 days. As of
this date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded he should be paid for 44 days of leave. He also claimed he
was denied pay for 14 days of leave accrued at the end of his most
recent (2005) active duty tour but provides no documentation regarding
this issue. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we
do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves,
sufficiently persuasive to override the evidence and rationale
provided by the Air Force. The applicant appears to have sold small
increments of leave from Mar 93 through Dec 00 for a total of 44 days.
We therefore adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our
decision that the applicant has not sustained his burden of having
suffered either an error or an injustice. In view of the above and
absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 3 Nov 05 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Sue A. Lumpkins, Member
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-01394 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Apr 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFRC/FMFQ, dated 24 Aug 05.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Aug 05.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00841
FMFO states the applicant had accrued nine and one-half days of leave while on his 91-day Military Personnel Appropriation (MPA) tour; however, he used three days of leave prior to the end of his tour. FMFQ states that during the applicant’s involuntary recall to EAD period, he accrued 60.5 days of leave of which he used 48 days. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR BC-2004-00841 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for...
After his retirement, he was informed he could not sell 60 days of leave because he had sold 54 days in 1978/1979 as an enlisted member. A copy of the complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Retirements Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPRR, advises that there is no provision in AFI 36-3203 to extend an approved retirement for the sole purpose to be paid for accrued leave or to take terminal leave. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded he...
AF | DRB | CY2002 | FD2002-0031
CONCLUSIONS: The Discharge Review Board concludes that the applicant's punitive discharge by Special Court Martial was appropriate under the facts and circumstances of this case and there is insufficient basis as an act of clemency for change of discharge. Svd: 04 Yrs 04 Mo 20 Das, of which AMs is 4 yrs 00 months 5 days (excludes 4 months 15 days lost time) . Sentence adjudged by military judge on 27 October 99: To be confined for 30 days, to be discharged from the Air Force with a bad...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01385
Applicant’s Leave Master Record reflects a BF-Leave balance of 35 days; Leave Sold - 6 days;, and Leave Balance - 29 days. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFRC/DPM reviewed this application and recommended applicant’s unit pay him for the 35 days of accrued and unused leave. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | DRB | CY2006 | FD2005-00367
AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD HEARING RECORD ISSUES AO1.OO A95.00 INDEX NUMBER A61.00 HEARING DATE CASE NUMBEK 07 Jul2006 z m & n ~ ~ ~ I FD-2005-00367 ~ D I S ~ A T Case heard at Washington, D.C. X X 1 2 3 4 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED TO TIIE BOARD ORDER APPOINTING THE HOARD APPLICATION FOR REVIEW OF DISCHARGE LETTER OF NOTIFICATION BRIEF 01: PERSONNEL FILE COIINSt1,'S KhLEASE TO THE BOARD ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS SURMITTFD A T TIMF OF PERSONAL, APPEARANCE TAPE RECORDING OF PERSONAI. SAFIMRRR 550 C...
# DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-00442 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: .. of the Departmeat of the Air Force relating to- e corrected to show that he had no other alternative but to mercial travel office (CTO) not under...
It was determined that applicant’s wife did not require a non-medical attendant and the applicant’s supervisor notified the applicant that he was not authorized to travel on the orders already cut but would be required to take leave. While applicant contends he did not know he was not authorized to use the orders, he did request leave in order to travel. The AFLSA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPE recommends the applicant’s request for removal of the referral OPR from his...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01837
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01837 (CASE 5) INDEX CODES: 135.00, 136.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His discharge of 13 May 94 be remanded to the Air Force Reserve, allowing for his application to retire on a date consistent with 31 Oct 94, and, his request for retirement be approved at the last grade he held. ...
AF | DRB | CY2003 | FD2002-0099
ISSUES: The applicant was discharged with a general service characterization from the Air Force for misconduct or, more specifically, minor disciplinary infractions. = FD20¢ DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE AIR FORCE DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD MATTER UNDER REVIEW: (Misconduct - Minor Disciplinary Infractions). c. If you determine this separation action is supported by the evidence, approve the separation action and direct the respondent be given a general discharge, with or without probation and...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01037
He used 20 days of leave during FY 05. Instead, the applicant lost the 10 days accrued leave in FY 05 and was paid for 10 days leave in FY 06. While we note, the applicant has requested restoration of 20 days of leave, DPSO has indicated the applicant was paid for 10.5 days of leave upon entering his extension.