Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00670
Original file (BC-2012-00670.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00670 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
1. His three (3) days of excess leave be restored and his debt of 
$1,425.68 be removed. 
 
2. As an alternative, he be recalled to active duty. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
The finance office made an error in calculating his days of leave 
and he is not sure why it took 9 months after his retirement to 
notify him of this error.   
 
On 27 Apr 12, he sent a letter stating the only document he had 
was  the  AF  IMT  988,  Leave  Request/Authorization,  for  his 
permissive TDY and terminal leave.  His leave request dates were 
based  on  his  1  Mar  22  retirement  date.    The  error  was  clearly 
made  by  the  finance  office  and  he  should  not  be  penalized  for 
their error. 
 
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of DFAS-
IN Form 0-641, Statement of Military Pay Account, a copy of his 
DD  Form  214,  Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from  Active 
Duty, and a personal statement. 
 
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
On  5  Apr  12,  AFPC/DPSIM  sent  the  applicant  a  letter  requesting 
additional  supporting  documentation  in  order  for  them  to 
substantiate his claim.  Specifically they requested he provide a 
letter  from  his  commander  verifying  the  circumstances  that 
transpired along with a letter from the finance office stating he 
was miscounseled.  
 
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 C. 
 
 

 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSIM  recommends  denial  stating  the  governing  instructions 
state  that  the  member  must  clearly  establish  that  an  error  or 
injustice by the Air Force caused the lost leave. 
 
The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The applicant is not sure what one day of leave has to do with 
his request as noted by AFPC/DPSIM.  His dispute is that in Oct 
11, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) mailed him 
a bill stating that he owes the Air Force $1,425.68.  The reason 
he has a debt is because he took more terminal leave than he was 
authorized.  When the finance technician calculated the number of 
days  of  leave  he  failed  to  add  the  2½  days  of  leave  that  he 
earned while in a permissive TDY status.  He did not notice this 
mistake and believes that it was not his responsibility to catch 
the mistake.  The only documentation he has is the AF Forms 988 
that was approved by his finance office.   
 
As  an  alternative,  if  the  Air  Force  Board  for  Corrections  of 
Military Records (BCMR) does not approve his request, he requests 
to be brought back on active duty. 
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit E. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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.    While  the 
applicant’s  contentions  are  duly  noted,  the  applicant  has  not 
provided  sufficient  evidence  to  establish  that  he  has  been  a 
victim of an error or injustice.  In this respect, the applicant 
has  not  shown  that  he  performed  due  diligence  with  regard  to 
reconciling his leave and earning statement and determining his 
accurate  leave  balance  prior  to  submitting  his  leave  request.  
Additionally,  he  has  not  provided  documentation  to  substantiate 

 

2 

he  was  miscounseled  or  provided  a  letter  from  his  commander  in 
support of his request.  Therefore, 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 that the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  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-2012-00670 in Executive Session on 20 Sep 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Feb 12, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 21 Jun 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Jul 12. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Jul 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 
 

 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 04029

    Original file (BC 2012 04029.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In a letter dated 16 Jul 13, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) administratively closed the applicant’s case because he did not indicate how he wanted his PTDY and terminal leave dates corrected. On 7 Nov 13, the applicant resubmitted his application and provided two AF IMTs 988 and a letter from his unit indicating the change to his PTDY and terminal leave dates were due to administrative duties in his workplace. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01547

    Original file (BC-2004-01547.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01547 INDEX NUMBER: 121.03 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 19.5 days of leave be restored to his leave balance. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPF recommends 17.5 days of leave be restored to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02851

    Original file (BC-2010-02851.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSOS states they support DPSOA’s recommendation for approval based on the applicant not being provided the opportunity to request withdrawal of his separation request. The complete HQ AFPC/DPSOS evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPSIM states commanders are the approval authority for terminal leave and do not normally allow members to return to duty after leave begins. The complete HQ AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00768

    Original file (BC 2014 00768.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    If he had known he would be losing six days of leave then he would have made adjustments to his PTDY and terminal leave dates. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant did not use six days of his annual/ordinary leave...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00392

    Original file (BC-2010-00392.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. 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 that the applicant has not been the victim...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03471

    Original file (BC-2012-03471.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 0101853

    Original file (0101853.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The information he received was incorrect; therefore, he was charged 8 days of excess leave (24-31 Oct 00). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSFM recommends the application be approved. The DFAS- POCC/DE evaluation,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04221

    Original file (BC 2014 04221.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Failure by the organizations to reflect debt on this checklist does not in any way represent a release or waiver of that debt.” A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01234

    Original file (BC-2012-01234.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Further, the Board notes the applicant submitted no evidence to substantiate his claim his final payment was in error with respect to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04876

    Original file (BC-2011-04876.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Then, she was on convalescent leave and in rehabilitation until 17 Sep 11, and not permitted to leave the local area due to her medical condition. The applicant lost 16 days of leave because her extensive convalescent leave and rehabilitation precluded her from taking ordinary leave. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show...