RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02876
                                        INDEX CODE:  104.00
                                        COUNSEL: NONE
                                        HEARING DESIRED: NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  20 March 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be released from recoupment of his debt for scholarship in the  Air
Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had a goal when he entered the AFROTC program in the fall of  2002.
His goal was to fly for the Air Force.  He wanted to be a pilot or  at
the least be a navigator.  During the summer of 2002 all  his  medical
tests were evaluated by  the  DoD  Medical  Examination  Review  Board
(DODMERB) who found him medically  fit  to  be  an  AFROTC  cadet  and
qualified him as a potential navigator.  He believes he was misled and
it was unjust for him to be informed that he  was  unqualified  for  a
pilot or navigator slot because of a medial problem that the Air Force
knew  he  had  for  more  than  a  year.   He  attended   Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University while in AFROTC.  His father is a teacher  and
his mother after 23 years as an educator is  medically  disabled.   He
has three siblings; the two youngest  are  adopted  and  have  special
needs.   He  currently  owes  the  government  more  than  $42,000  in
scholarship  reimbursement  which  he  should  not  have  to  pay   in
consideration of his situation.  It is going to be a challenge for him
to start a new path in life and a big change  in  his  lifestyle.   He
humbly asks he be pardoned from this debt.

In support of his appeal, applicant submits a  personal  statement,  a
copy of the DODMERB  letter  and  documentation  stating  his  current
sitting height. His submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to available records, on 18 September  2002,  the  applicant
enlisted as a  cadet  in  a  4-year  AFROTC  program  at  Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical University.

On  25  June  2004,  the  applicant   initiated   his   self-initiated
elimination request.  On this same date, his  commander  approved  his
request and advised the applicant of the consequences of his  request.
On 25 June 2004, the applicant acknowledged receipt and that he  fully
understood the consequences of his request to SIE.  On 16 August 2004,
the AFROTC detachment commander initiated the disenrollment action and
recommended the applicant be disenrolled from  AFROTC  for  breach  of
AFROTC contract.   The  applicant  was  advised  of  his  right  to  a
disenrollment investigation which he elected to waive.

On 22 October 2004, the approval authority approved the recommendation
that  the  applicant  be  disenrolled  from  AFROTC  and   scholarship
entitlements be terminated effective 29 October 2004,  and  recoupment
action regarding repayment of his scholarship debt be initiated.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFOATS/JA recommends the application be denied.  AFOATS/JA states  the
applicant has not submitted sufficient evidence  to  substantiate  his
request and in accordance  with  AFOATSI  36-2011,  Administration  of
Senior ROTC Cadets, Chapter 3.11,  “A  physical  screened  as  PPQ/PNQ
strictly applies for  rated  categorization  and  only  indicates  the
“potential” of a rated  certification.   Prior  to  commissioning  and
going to  Field  Training,  the  applicant  received  a  commissioning
physical  where  it   was   determined   his   “accommodative   power”
disqualified him from pilot and  navigator  qualification.   AFOATS/JA
advises the applicant was only disqualified from becoming a  pilot  or
navigator; he was never disqualified from becoming an officer  in  the
United States Air Force.  The applicant signed a contract  stating  he
would complete a 4-year scholarship majoring in Aerospace Engineering.
 The contract did not state he was to receive  a  pilot  or  navigator
slot.  The AFOATS/JA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states he made a verbal request for a medical  waiver  or  a
possible change in degree program.  He was told that a medical  waiver
was unattainable for his condition and that a  degree  transfer  would
result in the same penalty now enforced on him.  Applicant  states  he
was under the impression that there were no medical factors inhibiting
his advancement into  pilot  or  navigator  training.   He  was  never
informed of any eye problem before signing his  scholarship  contract.
If the Air Force had informed him he was not medically qualified for a
pilot or navigator slot before he joined AFROTC,  he  would  not  have
signed the contract or would have pursued an alternate  major  through
AFROTC.  The applicant’s letter, with attachment, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

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  that  would  persuade  us  that
remission of the applicant's indebtedness is warranted.  The Air  Force
Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) contract is specific  in  which
it states the applicant would complete a 4 year scholarship majoring in
Aerospace Engineering.  The applicant’s desire to  become  a  pilot  is
noted; however, the contract did not state he was to receive a pilot or
navigator slot.  When the applicant decided to request a Self-initiated
Elimination (SIE) he did  not  honor  his  AFROTC  contract  and  fully
understood the consequences of his decision to SIE.   Therefore,  after
reviewing all the evidence provided, the Board  is  not  persuaded  the
applicant’s  rights  were  violated,  or  that  he  was   treated   any
differently than any other Air Force member in the same situation.   In
view of this, the Board agrees with the opinion and  recommendation  of
the Air Force and adopts the rationale as the basis for our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.
Therefore, we find no 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 probable 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 14 December 2005, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                  Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr, Member
                  Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered  for  AFBCMR  Docket
Number 2005-02876:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, 8 Sep 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFOATS/JA, dated 18 Oct 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Oct 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 10 Nov 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair