Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00465
Original file (BC-2011-00465.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00465 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Twenty-three (23) days of leave be restored to her leave 
account. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

While assigned to CENTCOM, she traveled with the commander, each 
of five years, 250-270 days a year to an imminent 
danger/hazardous duty area. Her tour there was from Aug 2002-
Jun 2007 and she held that travel schedule throughout her time 
there. During that time, taking leave was almost impossible due 
to the constant battle rhythm, both stateside and overseas. 
Secretary of Defense Policy at that time authorized her Special 
Leave Accrual (SLA). She fell into the category of 4 years SLA 
for 120 days carryover from her last deployment date, Feb 07. 

 

In Fiscal Year 2007 (FY07) and FY08, she requested SLA and was 
approved to carryover 120 days of leave. She continued to 
aggressively utilize her leave as much as her job allowed. Due 
to the large backlog she again requested SLA in FY09. However, 
she came to understand that her SLA request in FY09 was lost 
when she changed jobs and was informed in Oct 09 that she had to 
either sell back or lose 10 days of leave. On the advice of her 
Military Personnel Flight (MPF), she sold back the 10 days. No 
mention was made of her additional leave being in jeopardy and 
in Nov 09, she looked at her Leave and Earnings Statement (LES) 
and noticed that she had lost 23 days of leave. 

 

She has been operating with the understanding that she qualified 
for 4 years, 120 days, SLA carry over and that balance would 
remain until FYll. She has actively tried to get her leave 
balance down as her leave request will show. She earned the 
leave and should not be stripped of that benefit due to 
confusion or a mistake. She respectfully requests the Board 
consider reinstating the 23 days lost at the end of FY09 or give 
her the option to at least sell those lost day's back. 

 


In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her 
Leave and Earnings Statements (LESs) for the contested period 
and other supporting documents. 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 26 May 11, a letter was sent to the applicant requesting 
additional documentation to substantiate her request. 
Specifically, a letter endorsed by her commander stating that 
she was not provided the opportunity to use leave or 
documentation revealing that she was denied leave due to mission 
requirements. AFPC/DPSIM, Special Programs, did not receive a 
response from the applicant. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIM reviewed this application and recommends denial, 
stating, in part, that their recommendation was due to the 
applicant's inability to provide sufficient evidence of material 
error or injustice. 

 

AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, paragraph 10.7 states the 
wing commander, MAJCOM or FOA/A1 or equivalent (colonel or 
above) approves SLA for their organization. Additionally, 
paragraph 10.9.8, 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. Paragraph 4.3 also states that 
unit commanders can disapprove leave requests due to military 
necessity or in the best interest of the Air Force. 

 

In accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for 
Correction of Military Records paragraph 4.1, the applicant has 
the burden of providing sufficient evidence of material error or 
injustice. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 23 Sep 11 for review and response within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(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. 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 the applicant has not 
been the victim of an error or injustice. In addition, should 
the applicant provide the specific information requested we 
would be inclined to reconsider her appeal. In view of the 
above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-00465 in Executive Session on 5 December 2011, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Jan 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 9 Sep 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Sep 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01612

    Original file (BC-2012-01612.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01612 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 4 days of lost leave be restored. AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, explains SLA shall not be a means to authorize the accumulation of leave in excess of 60 days (75 days from 1 October 2008 through 30 September 2013) when it is a result of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00868

    Original file (BC 2014 00868.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice that warrants restoring 2.5 days of leave to the applicant’s records. If, at any time, the leave balance drops to or goes below 60 days (75 days during the period 1 Oct 08 to 30 Sep 15), then...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03471

    Original file (BC-2012-03471.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03471 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 17 days of lost leave be restored, or as an alternative, he be allowed to sell back 15 days of leave. AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, explains Special Leave Accrual (SLA) allows members who are faced with circumstances that prohibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 01775

    Original file (BC 2012 01775.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to the information provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility the applicant carried forward 63.5 days of leave at the beginning of FY 2010. 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Exhibit C....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01302

    Original file (BC-2012-01302.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01302 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 27 days of leave she lost at the end of fiscal year (FY) 2011 be restored. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was unable to use 27 days of leave due to her being deployed in support of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03925

    Original file (BC-2011-03925.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    This extension was completed, signed, and approved in Mar 2009; however, the local personnel office said they could not update the system until 1 Dec 2009, which was the first day of her extension. In this regard, we note that DPSIM initially recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request; however, after reviewing the extension paperwork, DPSIM now recommends 17.5 days of leave be restored to her leave account and we agree. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04787

    Original file (BC-2012-04787.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary which is attached at Exhibits C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating the applicant has not demonstrated a clear error or injustice. If at any time the leave balance drops to or goes below 75 days, then there is no longer any SLA protected leave. ...

  • 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01027

    Original file (BC-2012-01027.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01027 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Eight (8) days of leave be restored to his leave account. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02326

    Original file (BC-2012-02326.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, paragraph 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'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16 July 2012 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). ...