RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00537 

 COUNSEL: None 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His $10,000 debt with the Defense Finance and Accounting 
Service (DFAS) be reversed and terminated. 

 

2. He be compensated with $1,626.56 for lost leave and fuel costs 
associated with his “fraudulent” permanent change of station 
(PCS). 

 

3. His characterization of service be restored to honorable. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He believes the government committed fraud as he was unlawfully 
PCS’d and harassed by personnel in a command he did not even 
know. Continuous harassment and tactics were used to push him 
into a courtroom and ask for a bad conduct discharge. Unlawful 
travel policies contributed to his situation. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his DD 
Forms 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; 
DFAS Account Statement; responses to a Congressional Inquiries; 
PCS Orders; personnel briefs; leave record; electronic 
communication; and Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs). 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who 
served on active duty from 1 June 1998 through 5 February 2010. 
He served as a Air Transportation Craftsman and was progressively 
promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). 

 

According to Special Court-Martial Order Number 19, dated 7 April 
2008, the applicant was charged with two specifications of 
larceny, in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of Military 
Justice (UCMJ); two specifications of making false statements, in 
violation of Article 107, UCMJ; and one specification of failure 
to obey a lawful order to report to his supervisor and one 


specification of failure to obey a lawful general regulation, 
both in violation of Article 92, UCMJ. Pursuant to a pretrial 
agreement, the applicant pled guilty to the charges and all 
specifications except for the failure to obey a lawful order to 
report to his supervisor. He was sentenced in accordance with 
his pleas by a military judge to a bad conduct discharge, 
confinement for nine months, reduction to the grade of airman 
basic (E-1), and a fine of $10,000 with the provision that he 
would serve an additional three months confinement if he did not 
pay the fine. On 31 March 2008, the convening authority, in 
accordance with his obligation under the pretrial agreement, 
approved only so much of the sentence as called for a bad conduct 
discharge, a fine of $10,000, and reduction to airman basic. The 
Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the findings and 
sentence on 26 November 2008. The applicant petitioned the 
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, but the 
petition was denied on 21 April 2009, making the findings and 
sentence in his case final and conclusive under the UCMJ. As a 
result, the applicant’s discharge was ordered to be executed on 
18 May 2009. 

 

The applicant was discharged effective 5 February 2010 with a bad 
conduct discharge and a narrative reason for separation as court-
martial (other). He served 11 years, 9 months, and 2 days on 
active duty. 

 

The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s 
military service record, are contained in the letters prepared by 
the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D, and E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: 

 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states upgrading the 
applicant’s bad conduct discharge is not appropriate. While 
clemency may be granted under Title 10, USC, Section 1552(f)(2), 
the applicant provides very little justification for his request 
and clemency is not warranted. The applicant pled guilty to the 
charges and all but one of the specifications. At trial he 
seemingly took responsibility for his actions. He went into 
detail with the military judge at trial and described how he felt 
he was guilty of those offenses. In addition, during his unsworn 
statement, the applicant stated “I know I have done a lot of 
things that are wrong.” However, in his application he does not 
include any documentation to support the idea that he continued 
to take responsibility for his own actions. Instead, his 
unsupported claims attempt to shift blame to the government. 

 

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

DFAS-IN recommends denial. DFAS-IN states the applicant was 
separated from the Air Force on 5 February 2010 due to a court-
martial conviction. Fines were levied based on the court-


martial. Without an Appellate Review Board overturning the 
court-martial decision, there is no standing to change either the 
discharge or the imposed fine. 

 

The complete DFAS-IN evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit 
D. 

 

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial in regard to the applicant’s request 
for compensation for leave associated with his PCS move. DPSIM 
states the applicant was notified of reassignment from McClellan 
Air Force Base (AFB), California (CA), to Travis AFB, CA, in 
September 2007. He commuted 200 miles roundtrip per day using as 
much leave (45 days at different intervals) as possible to avoid 
the cost of $35 per day in fuel costs from his home in Wheatland, 
CA, to Travis AFB, CA. The supported documentation does not show 
where the applicant was forced to take 45 days leave against his 
will; however, it does indicate he decided not to relocate in 
association to his PCS; therefore, he accepted the consequences 
associated with his decision. 

 

The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 24 June 2011 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F). As of this date, this office has received no 
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 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-00537 in Executive Session on 24 January 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00537: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jan 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 25 Apr 11. 

Exhibit D. Letter, DFAS-IN, dated 26 Apr 11, w/atch. 

Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 7 Jun 11. 

Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jun 11. 

 

 

 

 

Panel Chair