RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03705 

 COUNSEL: None 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

The amount reported on her Form W2, Wage and Tax Statement, as 
submitted by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to 
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in 2009, be corrected. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Her court-martial order states that the fine, which was part of 
her recommended punishment, was not approved. The Air Force 
Court of Criminal Appeals decision notes indicate the same. 

 

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her 
General Court-Martial Order, investigation documents, a personal 
statement, the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals decision, DFAS 
correspondence, collection documentation, appeal documents, and 
Department of Treasury correspondence. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

On 18 April 2007, while serving in the grade of senior airman, 
the applicant faced a general court-martial for one specification 
of making a false official statement, in violation of Article 
107, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); and, one 
specification of larceny, in violation of Article 121, UCMJ. 
According to the General Court-Martial Order, the applicant did, 
at Kunsan Air Base, Republic of Korea, on or about 8 November 
2004, with the intent to deceive, sign an official document, to 
wit: PCS In-processing Worksheet BAQ Certification, in which she 
stated, “I receive BAQ at the with-dependent rate for my spouse, 
child, and/or parent. My dependents [sic] current address is: 
436 W. 49th Street, New York, New York 10023.” which document was 
false in that she did not have dependents residing at 436 W. 49th 
Street, New York, New York, and was then known by her to be 
false. In addition, the applicant did, at or near Kusan Air 
Base, Republic of Korea, and at or near the continental United 
States, on divers occasions between on or about 1 November 2004 
and on or about 28 September 2006, steal United States currency, 


to wit: military allowances and entitlements, military property, 
of a value of over $500, the property of the United States. The 
applicant pled not guilty to the offenses, but was found guilty 
of the charges and specifications by a panel of officer and 
enlisted members. The panel members sentenced the applicant to a 
bad conduct discharge (BCD), confinement for four months, a fine 
in the amount of $11,940.00, forfeiture of all pay for four 
months, and reduction to the grade of airman basic (E-1). On 
18 July 2007, the convening authority approved the findings and 
only so much of the sentence as approved for a BCD, confinement 
for four months, and reduction to the grade of airman basic. On 
17 September 2008, the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals 
affirmed the findings and sentence. On 15 January 2009, the 
United States Court of Criminal Appeals denied the applicant’s 
petition for review, making the case final and conclusive under 
the UCMJ. As a result, on 2 March 2009, the applicant’s BCD was 
ordered to be executed. 

 

In response to an inquiry from the applicant disputing her 
indebtedness with the Department of Defense, on 30 September 
2011, DFAS indicated the applicant’s debt in the amount of 
$15,194.89 was valid. They stated that added interest, penalty, 
and administrative fees, totaling $899.71, brought the balance 
due to $16,094.60. They also indicated the debt consists of two 
parts. The first part was due to the overpayment of Variable 
Housing Allowance (VHA) for the periods of 4 November 2004 
through 30 November 2004, and 23 November 2005 through 30 March 
2006. The second part was due to her forfeiture of pay which was 
not fully collected prior to her separation. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: 

 

DFAS-IN recommends denial. DFAS-IN states the applicant was 
discharged from the service due to a General Court-Martial Order, 
dated 18 July 2007. Final sentence resulted in a BCD, 
confinement for four months, forfeiture of all pay for four 
months (confinement period), and reduction to the grade of airman 
basic. When final review of all pay and allowances was 
calculated, it was determined that VHA for the periods 4 November 
2004 through 20 November 2004 and 23 November 2005 through 
30 March 2006, was an over payment. This alone resulted in a 
debt of $10,307.23. The balance of the applicant’s debt is the 
collection of pay and allowances for excess leave. The debt was 
not part of the wages reported for tax year 2007. There was no 
W-2 issued for tax year 2008. Once the debt was determined to be 
valid, it was reported to the IRS as unearned income. No relief 
is necessary as the debt is valid. 

 

The complete DFAS-IN evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

AFLOA/JAJM states the applicant correctly points out that a fine 
was not included in the approved sentence from her 2007 general 


court-martial. JAJM offers no opinion on the question of how 
this affects the applicant’s request for relief. 

 

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: 

 

The DFAS letter has errors and incorrect information. Final 
action in her court-martial indicates that only so much as 
provided for a BCD, confinement for four months, and reduction to 
the grade of airman basic was approved. In the approved action, 
there is no further mention of a fine of $11,940.00 or forfeiture 
of pay for four months. 

 

AFLOA/JAJM supports her claim that no fine or monies owed were 
included in her approved sentence. The injustice is the fines 
were removed and should be reflected as such by DFAS and the 
collection agency records, as the fines were not approved by the 
convening authority. The collection agency should no longer be 
harassing her, as these fines were never valid. 

 

The IRS confirms her claim showing a reporting error. The IRS 
determined that the income was reported and taxes were paid. The 
IRS has corrected the error by dismissing the Form W2 reported by 
the Air Force and amending the amount owed to the IRS from 
$3,922.00 to $0.00 owed. Based on the false amount DFAS says was 
taxable wages, she has provided documentation as proof to support 
the IRS based their decision on such evidence. 

 

The applicant’s complete rebuttal, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 that would 
warrant action by the Board. The applicant is requesting the 
amount reported on her Form W-2 in 2009 be corrected; however, we 
note that this Board lacks authority to make a direct correction 
to the W-2 and can only correct an underlying Air Force record 
that may have caused the W-2 to be in error. The applicant 
attributes the amount reflected on her W-2 as incorrect in the 
belief it reflects the amount of the fine and forfeiture of pay 
she was originally assessed by sentence of court-martial. 
However, she asserts the fine and forfeitures were not approved 


by the appeal authority. Based on the evidence of record and in 
an attempt to guide the applicant to the proper office for 
resolution, we determined the applicant is correct in that, the 
original court-martial punishment included a fine in the amount 
of $11,940.00 and forfeiture of all pay and allowances for a 
period of four months. We also concur that these portions of the 
proposed punishment was later suspended by the convening 
authority and confirmed by the Air Force Court of Criminal 
Appeals. However, based on our review of the evidence, we have 
determined that the fine and assessed forfeitures are not the 
source of the erroneous reporting to the IRS. Rather, a portion 
of the current debt is a result of the erroneous payment of pay 
and allowances during the applicant’s four months of 
incarceration and the requirement under law, Title 10, Section 
858B, which requires an automatic forfeiture of pay and 
allowances for any sentence that includes confinement of six 
months or less and either a Bad Conduct or Dishonorable 
discharge. While we find no basis for the Board to grant the 
applicant any relief, we believe she is the victim of an error 
caused by the DFAS. In this regard, we note that since DFAS 
erroneously paid the applicant pay and allowances through July 
2007, through no fault of the applicant, we advise the applicant 
to petition the DFAS to request a remission for that portion of 
her debt. Notwithstanding this determination, the remaining 
portion of her debt includes monies owed in the amount of 
$10,307.23 due to overpayment of Variable Housing Allowance (VHA) 
for the periods 4 November 2004 through 30 November 2004 and 
23 November 2005 through 30 March 2006, which was incurred by the 
applicant’s own misconduct of falsifying VHA entitlements and as 
such, is a valid debt. Therefore, based on the foregoing, there 
is no basis for the Board to take action on the applicant’s 
request. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2011-03705 in Executive Session on 17 July 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-2011-03705: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Sep 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, DFAS/IN, not dated. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 24 Oct 11. 

Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Dec 11. 

Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 02 Dec 11, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

Panel Chair