RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03794
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) be changed from 19 Aug
13 to 19 Feb 13.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His orders reflect the 30-month commitment. He signed the
commitment papers when he joined knowing it was for 30 months.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
Financial Assistance Program (FAP) contract, and a copy of his AF
IMT 766, Extended Active Duty Order.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicants FAP contract reflects that he would complete his
specialized training program and begin participation on 30 Jun
10. He committed to return 2 years and 6 months on extended
active duty and 5 years and 6 months in the Inactive Ready
Reserve (IRR) for receiving 1 year, 5 months, and 9 days of
sponsorship in the Air Force FAP.
The applicants AF IMT 766 dated 25 Mar 10, block 10, reflects he
was ordered to active duty, voluntary, for a period of 30 months.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force, which is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPAME recommends denial. The applicants ADSC for the FAP
sponsorship is 2 years and 6 months, which gives him a date of
separation of 19 Feb 13. However, DPAME points-out that IAW the
governing instructions the minimum term of service (MTOS) is
3 years. The applicants ADSC of 2 years and 6 months is
correct; nevertheless, his MTOS is 3 years with an established
ADSC of 19 Aug 13.
The complete DPAME evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant responds by stating that his FAP contract clearly
states:
a. Item 22 his term of service of 2 years and 6 months of
active duty.
b. Item 24 describes the FAP contract as a contract between
him and the USAF and there are no other oral or other
understandings that could affect this contract other than what is
listed within the FAP contact.
c. Item 12, paragraph a, states, the minimum active duty
obligation (ADO) is 2 years or the time of participation in FAP
plus one year whichever is greater. There is no mention of the
governing instruction or MTOS of 3 years anywhere in the
contract.
He does not believe the FAP contract is designed to deceive
applicants; however, his ADSC has been changed unjustly.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. In this regard,
we note the applicant provided a profusion of evidence, to
include his signed FAP contract, which clearly states that he
shall serve 2 years and 6 months on extended active duty.
Although we note the Air Force office primary responsibility
advises that the minimum MTOS of 3 years is in accordance with
governing instructions, we believe that since the applicants
contract reflects 2 years, and 6 months to serve on active duty,
he should not be held liable for any additional service that is
not reflected in the contract. Therefore, we recommend the
records be corrected as indicated below. The Board suggests the
Air Force should closely review future FAP contracts to reflect
clear and specific MTOS to eliminate future errors.
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 issue involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that his Active Duty
Service Commitment (ADSC) was established as 19 February 2013
rather than 19 August 2013.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-03794 in Executive Session on 6 Mar 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPAME, dated 14 Nov 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Dec 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 28 Dec 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00914
The Air Force assumed the applicant was training in general surgery. DPAME recommended the applicant be discharged with recoupment ordered for breach of contract and the Air Force's requirement for general surgery versus anesthesiology. However, 2 1/2 months into the FAP program he voluntarily changed residency training from general surgery to anesthesiology without the approval to do so, as stipulated in his contract.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01454 INDEX CODE: 128.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His active duty obligation for sponsorship in the Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship Program (AFHPSP) be fulfilled prior to his active duty obligation for sponsorship in the Air Force Academy (USAFA). In support of his...
On 27 October 1997, applicant requested his release from active duty stating Miscellaneous Reasons for the reason for action requested. Applicant contends that he agreed to join the military for four years because his recruiter led him to believe that his pay would be $8,000.00 more per year; and that a fair settlement would be a partial waiver of his ADSC and acceptance of his separation from the Air Force on July 28, 1999. The fact that he did not supports the conclusion that the total...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00764
His six-year ADSC he received for a civilian-sponsored neurosurgery residency training from 1994 to 2000 be removed. The applicant, in his position as consultant for neurosurgery for the Air Force for the past six years, has successfully set up Air Force training for residents in neurosurgery and has done everything possible to recruit by equating the commitment to that of other services and other Air Force training programs. In addition, while we understand the applicant believes the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01721
The ADSC contract contains a statement that seems to allow the Air Force to not be held responsible in initial calculation of the dates. Although he believed the contract to be in error and states he pointed the error out to officials at the Air Force Personnel Center, he was assured the 2 March 2009 ADSC date was correct. Applicant believes that because he initially pointed the error out and was assured no error existed at the time, he should not he held liable and the 2 March 2009 ADSC...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03423
around an ADSC of 2010. Furthermore, he is requesting an ADSC of 29 June 2010, a date computed in error. An audit of his records revealed an error in the original calculation and he was provided with a letter identifying the error on 27 September 2007.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01347
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01347 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be paid the Dental Officer Multi-Year Retention Bonus (DOMRB) based on his four-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) effective 23 December 2012. In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of his AFRS IMT 1430, Statement of Understanding - Applicant for Extended Active Duty -...
The applicant’s initial USUHS contract would govern any ADSC associated with educational programs regardless of the time he actually enters training. DPAME also noted that current and past regulatory guidance is that obligation for civilian sponsorship is always served consecutively to any pre-existing ADSC. Actually, the regulation he was provided did indicate a consecutive obligation for civilian sponsored training, although his ADSC is governed by the language in his contract.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00662
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00662 INDEX CODE: 113.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) for promotion to major be changed from 17 February 2005 to 17 April 2003. At a minimum, he believes that his date of rank should be changed to the original...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04303
The initial action, taken by the Air Force, in disqualifying her from the scholarship program required her to drop out of medical school and resign her commission. On 19 November 1999, the applicant’s 30 August 1999 resignation was accepted by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC). It was only after she informed the Air Force of her decision to drop out of medical school that she was told she could not be discharged for depression and that the information and guidance...