RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00004 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He receive a waiver of the recoupment of his pro-rata share of 
unserved active duty service commitment (ADSC) associated with 
his United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) scholarship. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He does not meet the requirements for AFI 36-3207, Recoupment 
Requirements, paragraph 1.16. 

 

His involuntary discharge reason does not fall under AFI 36-
3206, Administrative Discharge Procedures for Commissioned 
Officers, Chapters 2 or 3. 

 

He agreed to serve as an officer in the Air Force as described 
in United States Code (U.S.C.), Title 10, Section 9348. His 
acceptance of a pilot slot was voluntary and separate from his 
ADSC and he was discharged involuntarily. 

 

His involuntary discharge and the needs of the Air Force took 
away his ability to fulfill his commitment and he was not given 
the opportunity to “accept an appointment as a commissioned 
officer as a Reserve in the Air Force for service in the Air 
Force Reserve” and to “remain in that Reserve component until 
completion of the commissioned service obligation of the cadet” 
as described in Section 9348. 

 

His desire was to remain on active duty and to retrain into 
another Air Force specialty at the time of his self-elimination. 

 

The recoupment decision will cause an undue financial hardship 
and will affect the rest of his life. 

 

He is being unfairly punished for an adverse action taken 
against him by the Air Force. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of 
extracts from his master personnel records and personal 
statements. 


 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 14 Jul 04, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force 
and was honorably discharged on 29 Jun 05. 

 

On 30 Jun 05, the applicant was appointed as a cadet at the Air 
Force Academy. 

 

On 27 May 09, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force as a 
second lieutenant. 

 

On 27 Dec 10, the applicant was discharged for failure to 
complete a course of instruction. 

 

Other relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the appropriate office of primary responsibility 
evaluations, which are at Exhibits C and D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSIP recommends denial and states the Air Force is 
required to recoup the pro-rata share of the applicant’s 
unserved ADSC. Further, the applicant’s voluntary elimination 
from pilot training rendered it impossible for him to complete 
the Air Force requirement for which he was accessed and thereby 
affected his ability to complete the required ADSC associated 
with his USAFA scholarship. 

 

DPSIP states the applicant is correct with his assertion of the 
governing instructions and U.S.C. However, he failed to note 
the Air Force Guidance Memorandum (AFGM) 1.1 to AFI 36-3207, 
which specifically covers separation procedures for probationary 
officers who do not complete initial skills training. The 
guidance memorandum was developed in accordance with Title 10, 
U.S.C., Section 2005 and states, “Unless waived by the Secretary 
of the Air Force or delegee, officers separated under this 
provision are subject to recoupment of education assistance, 
special pay or bonus money received. Nothing in the AFGM 
changes existing recoupment criteria and procedures. 

 

Further, Title 10, U.S.C., Section 9348, refers to Title 37, 
U.S.C., Section 303a, which states, “Except as provided in 
paragraph {2(Sole Survivorship discharge)} and {3(Member of the 
uniformed service dies or is retired or separated with a combat- 


related disability)}, a member of the uniformed services who 
receives a bonus or similar benefit and whose receipt of the 
bonus or similar benefit is subject to the condition that the 
member continue to satisfy certain eligibility requirements 
shall repay the United States an amount equal to the unearned 
portion of the bonus or similar benefit if the member fails to 
satisfy the eligibility requirements and may not receive any 
unpaid amounts of the bonus or similar benefits after the member 
fails to satisfy the requirements, unless the Secretary 
concerned determines that the imposition of the repayment 
requirement and termination of the of unpaid amounts of the 
bonus or similar benefit with regard to the member would be 
contrary to a personnel policy or management objective, would be 
against equity and good conscience, or would be contrary to the 
best interests of the U.S. The Secretary concerned may 
establish, by regulations, procedures for determining the amount 
of the repayment required under this subsection and the 
circumstances under which an exception to the required repayment 
may be granted. The Secretary concerned may specify in the 
regulations the conditions under which an installment payment of 
a bonus or similar benefit to be paid to a member of the 
uniformed services will not be made if the member no longer 
satisfies the eligibility requirements for the bonus or similar 
benefit.” 

 

Further, on 22 Sep 10, a panel of senior officers met and based 
upon the Air Force requirements, the applicant’s skill, 
education, desires, and his commander’s recommendation, the 
panel determined the applicant’s reclassification was not in the 
best interest of the Air Force. The discharge authority agreed 
with the findings and directed discharge. 

 

The complete DPSIT evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

HQ AFPC/JA recommends denial and states they concur with DPSIT. 
Further, the decision to discharge the applicant was in essence 
a force management decision made after careful evaluation of all 
the factors in his record. The Secretary of the Air Force acted 
in the best interest of the Air Force. 

 

The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 Feb 11 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has not received a 
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. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

4. 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 Docket Number 
BC-2011-00004 in Executive Session on 3 May 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 


 

The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket 
Number BC-2011-00004: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Dec 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIP, dated 12 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/JA, dated 31 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Feb 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair