Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00737-2
Original file (BC-2007-00737-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                                 ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00737
            INDEX CODE:  136.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for reconsideration,  he  requests  the  debt  he
incurred as a result of the correction to his records be remitted.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 13 Oct 53.  He  was  released
from active duty and transferred to the Air Force  Reserve  on  12  Sep  57.
His grade at the time of his release from  active  duty  was  airman  second
class (A2C/E-3).  He was credited with 3 years, 11  months  of  active  duty
service.

He served in the Air Force Reserve from 13 Sep 57  until  his  discharge  on
15 Sep 88 due to physical disability with entitlement to severance pay.   He
was progressively promoted to the grade of senior master  sergeant  with  an
effective date and date of rank of 17 Oct 63.  Applicant was  credited  with
11.30 years of active duty service for pay at the  time  of  his  discharge.
His ARPC Form 168, dated 26 Aug 88 reflects he was  credited  with  31 years
and 11 months of satisfactory Federal service.

On 18 Sep 87, the Board considered and approved his request  to  be  retired
at age 60, rather than separated with severance pay.  For an  accounting  of
the facts and circumstances surrounding  the  applicant’s  separation,  and,
the rationale of the earlier decision  by  the  Board,  see  the  Record  of
Proceedings at Exhibit F.

In Jun 06, the applicant submitted a  request  questioning  Defense  Finance
and Accounting Service’s (DFAS’s) authority to recoup the severance  pay  he
received at discharge and requested they provide him  documentation  of  the
pay he received.  In addition, applicant requests the Board remit  the  debt
he incurred as a result of the money being recouped by DFAS (Exhibit G).

On 18 Apr 07, DFAS provided a response to the  applicant’s  request.   Their
computation was based on applicant’s time in service of  11.30  years  times
his basic pay in 1988.  Applicant was advised that computations  were  based
on basic pay in 1988 and documentation from this time period  is  no  longer
available.  Computation of the  amount  due,  if  any,  as  a  result  of  a
correction of records, is a function of DFAS (See Exhibit H).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s  request  to  have
his debt incurred as a result of the Board’s earlier decision  remitted.   A
careful reading of the documents provided by applicant reveals  he  believes
the law does not require his severance pay to be recouped.   However,  while
the Board is sympathetic to the applicant’s situation, no evidence has  been
provided to the Board’s satisfaction that the earlier decision  was  not  in
accordance with applicable laws and policies in effect at the time  or  that
he was treated differently than others similarly situated.  We further  note
the applicant was advised the severance pay he received resulting  from  his
correction of  records  would  be  recouped.   Therefore,  we  conclude  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden  of  having  suffered  either  an
error or injustice  and  in  the  absence  of  persuasive  evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief
sought in this application.

2.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been  shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will  materially  add  to
our understanding of the issues involved.   Therefore,  the  request  for  a
hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 26 July 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
      Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit F.  Record of Proceedings, dated 22 Nov 04,
                with Exhibits.
      Exhibit G.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 28 Jun 06, with
                attachments.
    Exhibit H.  Email, DFAS, dated 18 Apr 07.




                                   Thomas S. Markiewicz
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01925

    Original file (BC-2005-01925.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    When he was on active duty from July 2002 through February 2004, he tried to resolve a portion of his debt. He believes the countless hours spent to resolve his pay record problems show that no one knows if his pay record is correct. He respectfully requests the Board waiver the remaining $3517.76 and have DFAS return the money he’s been paying them in the time he’s tried to resolve this case.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00737

    Original file (BC-2004-00737.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00737 INDEX CODE: 136.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show that he retired from the Air Force Reserve at age 60 rather than being separated with Disability Severance Pay. He was briefed that the letter of eligibility for retired pay at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01570

    Original file (BC 2013 01570.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by DFAS and the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS recommends relief be granted, indicating that there are competing statutes and implementing directives which prevented the applicant from fulfilling her five-year ADSC. By law, the applicant had to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02194

    Original file (BC-2005-02194.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the time of her separation she had been disqualified from Air Traffic Control duties and had been continued on active duty awaiting waivers and Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) processing. With regard to the presence of medical conditions that were potentially disqualifying for controller duties, the Medical Consultant states the fact that she decided to voluntarily separate under pregnancy provisions rather than remain on active duty and complete the planned evaluations and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03707

    Original file (BC-2011-03707.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03707 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retired pay be calculated under the Final Basic Pay retirement plan rather than the High-36 retirement pay plan and his debt be removed. The complete DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, stating, in part, there is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001908

    Original file (0001908.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that it is not true that his depression predated his Accession Physical exam on 12 December 1991. He states, at no time prior to this date had he been diagnosed with depression. He further states that if the decision is that the funds expended for his education are to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00223

    Original file (BC-2004-00223.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 10 Sep 03, the Board did not restore his SSgt grade but instead promoted him to senior airman effective 9 Apr 03 and waived the HYT restriction so he could be eligible for promotion consideration by the 04E5 cycle. His present reenlistment (RE) code of 4D renders him ineligible to reenlist because of HYT restrictions, i.e., he has not yet been promoted to SSgt. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPRR notes the applicant is not reenlistment eligible,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00839

    Original file (BC-2006-00839.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS-POCC/DE recommends denial and states after contacting the Remissions and Waiver Branch for a recommendation, that office notified them had they received the applicant’s remission request prior to his separation, they would have recommended the debt be collected in full. Applying this method to the fourth shipment produced a net weight of 3,120 pounds (78 inventory times 40 pounds), at a cost of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-02601

    Original file (BC-2008-02601.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He requested his former spouse be removed from SBP and stated that his current spouse wished to waive her right to SBP coverage. The finance center received his notification of divorce in Oct 95 and SBP spouse coverage and premiums were suspended. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a notarized statement from his current spouse waiving her right to SBP spouse coverage dated 15 Sep 08 (Exhibit D).

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702785

    Original file (9702785.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC 2 4 JUL 1998 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-02785 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: application was partially approved by competent authority in the amount of $78 1.25. rds of the Department of the Air Force relating...