RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03796
COUNSEL:
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be entitled to all pay and allowances from being placed on
involuntary excess leave during the period of 29 September 2007
through 31 December 2007.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
According to AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, paragraph
6.8.3, and 6.8.4.1, he qualifies for pay and allowances when
placed in involuntary excess leave status.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of
DFAS-IN Form 0-642, an excerpt from AFI 36-3003 and a copy of
his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Based on the available records, the applicant was discharged
from all appointments under the provisions of AFI 36-3207, Separating Commissioned Officers, with a narrative reason for
separation of In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, and issued an
Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) character of
service. He was credited with 4 years, 5 months and 2 days of
active duty service.
The applicant previously submitted a request, which was granted
in part, for receipt of pay and allowances from involuntary
excess leave from 29 August 2007 through 28 September 2007,
erroneously charged in conjunction with his 31 December 2007
separation (Exhibit B).
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
DFAS-IN recommends denial. In an undated advisory opinion,
DFAS-IN states the period identified by the applicant is listed
as appellate review leave. This leave was assigned based on the
applicants resignation in lieu of trial by court-martial. The
applicant references AFI 36-3003, paragraph 6.8.4 which reads:
Reverting to Pay Status for Appellate Review Leave. For
overruled or set-aside court martial sentences, members:
6.8.4.1 Qualify for excess leave taken when directed by the unit
commander. This reference clearly states the application is
only in cases where the court-martial sentences were either
overruled or set-aside. The applicant has provided no evidence
to apply this instruction.
The complete DFAS-IN evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. DPSIM states AFI 36-3003, note
below Para 10.9, states in part, the only way a member can
revert to pay status from Appellate Review Leave for set-aside
court-martial sentences is if the unit commander directs it.
Additionally, the applicant failed to provide a memorandum
signed by the unit commander stating that the applicant
qualified for pay and allowances for the excess leave taken. In
accordance with AFI 36-3003, Para 6.8.5, excess leave is
considered as leave without pay and allowance and they do not
receive disability pay, if injured, for time spent on excess
leave. The applicant was on Appellate Review Leave and
allowances were not approved by unit commander.
The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force advisories were mailed to the applicant
on 17 April 2012 for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit E). To date, a response has not been received.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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 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 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-2011-03796 in Executive Session on 28 June 2012, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-03796 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 November 2010.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, DFAS-IN, not dated.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 10 April 2012.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 April 2012.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00850
On 14 August 2013, the CAAF set-aside the United States Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) decision to affirm the guilty finding with respect to the Charge and Specification 2, committing indecent acts upon the body of female under the age of 16, because the specification failed to state an offense and the government failed to provide notice of the missing element during its case- in-chief. Specifically, AF Form 4363, which states the reasons for the Promotion Propriety Action lists both...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 01775
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05042
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial of the applicants request to set aside her GCM conviction, as it pertains to Charge I, making a false official statement, and its specifications. Further, we believe the applicants record should be corrected to show that on 3 February 2011, the date after she was released from MSR until 6 September 2013, the date the AFCCA affirmed the findings and sentence, she was on appellate leave without pay and points. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012-05430
The applicant was charged for 15 days of leave for rest and recuperation and 22 and a half days of leave were accumulated while deployed; however, it was not designated as being tax exempt. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends restoring the 15 days of accrued leave. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records relating to the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00537
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. The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants military service record, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D, and...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03634
DPSIM states that the applicant provided a letter from DFAS, dated 2 Aug 2012, stating that a re-audit of his account revealed that he was entitled to sell 29.5 days of leave due to late posting of his terminal leave and due to being AWOL for one day on 25 Jan 2011. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 2 Jan 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jan 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03471
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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-00888
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00888 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive back pay and allowances for the time he spent in confinement in excess of 98 days. However, they did not believe that a rehearing was needed and reassessed his sentence of a bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 98 days, and reduction to...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04869
On 5 Apr 83, the applicant was furnished a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) with the Narrative Reason for Separation of Conviction by Court MartialOther Than Desertion. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04460
Members application must clearly establish that an error or injustice by the Air Force caused the members lost leave. If the Board restores leave to current leave account, members must use these days before the end of the current FY. On 29 Nov 2011, DPSIMC requested additional documentation from the applicant to support his claim; specifically orders received from all deployments that prevented him from using the lost four days of leave during FY 2011. ...