RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04091
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His official records be corrected to show that:
1. His Date of Rank (DOR) and effective date for the rank of
Senior Airman (E-4) reflect 1 Feb 11, instead of 28 Sep 11.
2. He receive back pay from 1 Feb 11 to 28 Sep 11.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The seven months he waited from the time of his disenrollment
from the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) until his accession into
the Air Force constitutes a great injustice. Through no fault
of his own, he was forgotten. During this inordinate delay, he
was considered an active airman in the Air Force, was subject
to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), yet received no
pay. He has lost seven months of his life that he could have
spent attending college or working.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of
Disenrollment Orders from USAFA, and AF Form 899, Request and
Authorization for Permanent Change of Station--Military.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air
Force which is at Exhibit C. Therefore, there is no need to
recite these facts in this record of proceedings.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ USAFA/A1A recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence
of an error or injustice. On 31 Jan 11, the applicant was
disenrolled from USAFA and placed in a Leave Without Pay status
while awaiting a decision from the Secretary of the Air Force
(SecAF) as to whether he would be ordered to active duty, or
required to reimburse the government for the cost of his USAFA
education. He departed the USAFA on 9 Feb 11 in a leave
without pay status to await the SecAFs decision. On 13 Jun
11, the SecAF directed the applicant to be transferred to the
Air Force Reserve in an enlisted status and ordered to active
duty for a period of three years. On 26 Sep 11, AFPC published
his extended active duty (EAD) orders. All of this was
accomplished IAW applicable governing guidance. Once the
determination was made that he would be serving on active duty,
HQ AFPC classified him with an enlisted AFSC, provided him an
assignment and training dates, and determined his DOR and
effective date IAW established guidelines. He was in leave
without pay status from the day he departed USAFA until he
reported for EAD. During this period he was not performing any
duty in an official capacity for the Air Force and should not be
entitled to any back-pay. Likewise, this period of time should
not be counted as active duty time for pay, time in service, or
retirement purposes.
A complete copy of the USAFA/A1A evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 16 Dec 11 for review and comment 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 an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants 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
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of 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 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-2011-04091 in Executive Session on 3 May 12, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Oct 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ USAFA/A1A, dated 24 Nov 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Dec 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02240
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. When a cadet is disenrolled or relieved from cadet status and transferred to the Air Force Reserves and ordered to extended active duty AFI 36-2502, states “Prior service disenrolled airmen receive their former grade and DOR with the effective date as the disenrollment date; second year disenrolled airmen receive the grade determined by AFI 36-2604.” AFI 36-2604, states “Former Air Force Academy cadets transferred to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03585
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2 Dec 05 for review and comment within 30 days. The additional evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response to the additional Air Force evaluation, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01492
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01492 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAFA/A1A recommends denying the applicants request to change his RE code. The applicants attorney states the applicant did not have the right to counsel at his...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02233
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he left the USAFA he made the wrong decision to reimburse the Air Force for his debt he incurred for his education, rather than serve on active duty as an enlisted member. He requested to be considered for an educational delay to pursue an Air Force Reserve Officer Training Commission and was given until 17 Jun 05, to submit additional matters to support his request. The SECAF granted his...
His case went to the Secretary of the Air Force where he was deemed unfit to serve as an enlisted member of the Air Force even though he received an honorable discharge from the Air Force. On 13 Feb 96, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the recommendation of the Superintendent, USAFA, to disenroll the applicant and directed that he be honorably discharged from the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Staff Judge...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03587
However, they do recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to show that the time of his disenrollment he was on conduct probation not academic probation. HQ USAFA/JA opines the applicant was not prejudiced by the error and that the applicant was disenrolled for his Wing Honor Code violations The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s counsel states in his response that...
On 29 Sep 98, the Secretary of the Air Force approved the recommendation of the United States Air Force Academy Superintendent to disenroll applicant and directed that he be honorably separated from cadet status, transferred to the Air Force Reserve and ordered to active duty for a period of three years. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Staff Judge Advocate, HQ USAFA/JA, stated that the applicant was disenrolled from the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02117
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02117 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Block 27, Reentry Code be changed from 4L, which denotes Separated commissioning program eliminee (OTS, AECP, and so on) to a code suitable for reentry into the armed services...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02829
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02829 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His name be included in the official list of United States Air Force Academy (USAFA) graduates, class of 1966. On 28 Apr 66, according to the DD Form 785, Record of Disenrollment from Officer Candidate-Type Training, the applicant was disenrolled for breach of Cadet Honor Code. Applicant did not file within three...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01161
The applicant was advised that he may present his case to a Hearing Officer, receive (if he choose to present his case to a Hearing Officer) all the rights of AFI 36-2020 and may use military witnesses provided the request for witnesses is timely submitted and, in the opinion of the Hearing Officer, the witnesses can present relevant evidence that cannot be reasonably received though videotape, deposition, interrogation, or sworn or unsworn written statement. The applicant was afforded due...