Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03371
Original file (BC-2005-03371.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03371
                                             INDEX CODE:  100.00
      XXXXXXX                           COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX                           HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  6 May 2007


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Six (6) days of leave be restored to his current leave balance.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He lost 6 days of leave due to temporary duty (TDY) requirements.

He was in a two-year Air Force  Institute  of  Technology  (AFIT)  sponsored
post-doctoral fellowship from 4 August 2003 to 29 July 2005  and  his  leave
was  limited  to  ensure  he  accrued  the  necessary  hours  of   specialty
certification.  He was assigned Permanent Change of Station (PCS) to Wright-
Patterson AFB in August 2005, he reported to duty as  soon  as  possible  to
ensure psychology residents did not miss out  on  training.   For  this  and
clinic manning reasons, he did not take extended leave in  conjunction  with
his PCS.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on active  duty  in  the  grade  of  captain.
From 4 August 2003 to 29 July 2005, he participated  in  an  AFIR  sponsored
post-doctoral fellowship in neuropsychology at the  National  Rehabilitation
Hospital in Washington, DC.  The applicant carried forward 54 days of  leave
at the beginning of Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05).  He earned  30  days  of  leave
during FY05 and used 18 days, resulting in a balance of 66  days  of  leave.
Since a member can only carry forward a maximum of 60 days  leave  into  the
next fiscal year, he lost 6 days of leave at the end  of  Fiscal  Year  2005
(FY05) leave balancing.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPF recommends the application be denied, and  states,  in  part,  that
the loss of leave was not an error or injustice caused  by  the  Air  Force.
The applicant decided to report for duty at Wright-Patterson AFB instead  of
using his accrued leave, resulting in his loss of 6 days  of  leave  at  the
end of FY05.

The AFPC/DPF evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  16
December 2005, for review and comment, within 30 days.  However, as of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.
Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling  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 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  Docket  Number  BC-2005-03371
in Executive Session on 24 January 2006, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

            Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
            Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
            Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Oct 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPF, dated 7 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Dec 05.




                                   MARILYN M. THOMAS
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03494

    Original file (BC-2005-03494.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, states in part that a member who is not eligible for Special Leave Accrual (SLA) can request recovery of lost days, but a member’s application for lost leave must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. According to HQ AFPC/DPF (Exhibit B), the applicant lost 7 days of leave at the end of FY05 [1 Oct 04 - 30 Sep 05]....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03806

    Original file (BC-2005-03806.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03806 INDEX CODE: 121.03 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 JUN 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Six (6) days of leave be restored to his leave account as of 2 Oct 05. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03511

    Original file (BC-2005-03511.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    AFI 36-3003, para 4, Military Leave Program, Use of Leave, recommends members be given the opportunity to take at least one leave period of 14 consecutive days or more each FY and encourage them to use the 30 days of leave they accrue each year. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSFOC recommended restoration of 22 days of leave, stating, in part, that finance was correct in stating that as long as the applicant started his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03268

    Original file (BC-2005-03268.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The Board is of the opinion the applicant is ultimately responsible for the management of his leave account and, he has not provided any supporting documentation showing the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00815

    Original file (BC-2006-00815.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He used six days of leave during FY05. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPF recommends partial relief by restoring 17 days of leave. They recommend 17 days of leave be restored because the applicant returned in time from his short-notice deployment to take seven days of leave before FY05 ended.

  • 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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03070

    Original file (BC-2005-03070.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    She earned 30 days of leave during FY05 and used 10 days. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPF states, AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, para 10.9.7, states in part member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. Applicant requests that twenty (20) days of leave be restored to her leave account.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00203

    Original file (BC-2006-00203.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00203 INDEX CODE: 108.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUL 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Nine (9) days of leave be added to his current leave balance. Additionally, paragraph 4.1.4, Use of Leave, recommends that members be given the opportunity to take at least one leave period...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00326

    Original file (BC-2006-00326.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, note below paragraph 10.9.7, states in part a member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. The applicant did not use any leave during FY05. The Board notes that post- deployment recovery time is not a valid reason for reinstatement of lost leave when accrued leave could have been taken in its place.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01122

    Original file (BC-2006-01122.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the majority of the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopts the OPR’s rationale as the basis for its conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the panel finds...