Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03378
Original file (BC-2006-03378.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03378
            INDEX CODE:  121.03
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  5 MAY 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her 8 days of lost leave for Fiscal Year (FY) 06 be restored.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her surgery was delayed due to mission requirements.  She was placed  on  34
days of convalescent leave from 22 Aug thru 24 Sep 06.  Upon  completion  of
her convalescent leave, she was only able to use 6 days  of  ordinary  leave
prior to 1 Oct 06.

In support of the application, the applicant submits  copies  of  her  leave
slips for the period in question.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of  technical
sergeant.  According to the information provided by the  office  of  primary
responsibility, the applicant lost 8 days of leave at  the  end  of  FY  06.
She carried forward 53 days of leave at the beginning of FY 06.  She  earned
30 days of leave during FY 06.  She used 15 days of leave during FY 06.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSO recommends denial.  DPSO states  AFI  36-3003,  Military  Leave
Program, note below 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.  Additionally, para 4.1.4,  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 encourages them to use the 30  days  of
leave.  DPSO states although the applicant was placed on convalescent  leave
from 22 Aug to 24 Sep 06, there is  no  compelling  evidence  or  supporting
documentation to show that  the  member  was  prevented  from  taking  leave
throughout the year (1 Oct 05 – 22 Aug 06)

The complete DPSO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  for
review and comment on 1 Dec 06.  As  of  this  date,  this  office  has  not
received a response (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 probable error or injustice.   We  are  not  persuaded  by  the
evidence presented that  the  applicant  suffered  an  injustice.   We  took
notice of her  complete  submission;  however,  it  does  not  override  the
opinion and recommendation provided by  the  Air  Force  office  of  primary
responsibility.  Therefore, based on the available evidence of  record,  the
Board majority  finds  no  basis  upon  which  to  favorably  consider  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 this application in  Executive
Session on 18 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
                  Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in  AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2006-03378:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, 25 Oct 06 w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSO, 28 Nov 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Dec 06.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00193

    Original file (BC-2006-00193.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force indicated that the applicant lost 7 days of leave at the end of FY 05. AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, note below Para 10.9.7, states, in part, that member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01605

    Original file (BC-2006-01605.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Additionally, paragraph 4.1.4, 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 encourages them to use the 30 days of leave they accrue each year. 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03599

    Original file (BC-2006-03599.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Based on information from the Air Force, applicant’s Master Military Pay Account (MMPA) reflects applicant lost 10 days of leave at the end of FY06 (30 Sep 06). ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPS reviewed this application and recommended denial, stating in part, member’s application must...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02719

    Original file (BC-2007-02719.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, note below paragraph 10.9.7., states in part that a member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. Therefore, 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. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Oct 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01181

    Original file (BC-2006-01181.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01181 INDEX CODE: 128.10 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 20 OCTOBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Excess leave in the amount of 151 days be changed to convalescent leave. On 21 October 2003, the commander notified the member that she was being discharged from the Air Force. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01863

    Original file (BC-2006-01863.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Jul 06 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). The Air Force contends the applicant could have used the remainder of his use/lose leave instead of PDRT during the 30 Jul to 30 Sep 03 period. Therefore, since FY06 is almost over and sufficient time must be allowed for processing, we recommend...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03393

    Original file (BC-2006-03393.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. They state, in part, member’s application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the member’s lost leave. Applicant indicated she was allowed to take two weeks of leave, even though the record reflects she did not take the leave.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03070

    Original file (BC-2006-03070.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant provided TDY and PCS orders, and leave documents. DPSO finds no compelling evidence suggesting the applicant was unable to take 21.5 days of leave throughout FY06 and concludes the leave lost was not an error or injustice caused by the Air Force. Since the applicant did not provide the additional information requested in order to sufficiently evaluate his claim, it is our opinion that no basis exists to grant his request.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00526

    Original file (BC-2007-00526.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00526 INDEX CODE: 121.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 AUG 2008 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Fifteen (15) days of leave be restored to his leave account as of 2 Oct 06. He used 10 days of leave during FY05. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03006

    Original file (BC-2008-03006.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The HQ AFPC/DPSOS’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/JA recommends the applicant’s nonselection for retention by the 6 June 2006 FSB be set aside and that she be considered by a special FSB selection board utilizing a corrected RRF. However, the majority of the Board believes that thorough and fitting relief in this case would be to correct her records to show that she was selected for retention by the 10 Apr 06 FSB, and to reinstate her to active duty. Accordingly, the...