Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01911
Original file (BC 2013 01911.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01911

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His pay date be changed to reflect 24 Jun 01, rather than 
29 May 02.

2.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) be 
changed to reflect 26 Jun 01 rather than 29 May 02.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not properly counseled at the United States Air Force 
Academy (USAFA) regarding his pay dates.  He was not notified of 
the change in his pay dates or of the $12,491.54 debt he 
incurred as a result of these changes. 

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

While attending the USAFA, the applicant was placed on medical 
turnback and in a leave without pay and allowance status from 
18 Jul 97 to 30 Jun 98.  The applicant was returned to USAFA 
cadet status on 2 Jul 98.  On 29 May 02, he was commissioned and 
entered active duty upon his graduation.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIPV recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The applicant contends the staff at 
the USAFA miscounseled him regarding his service dates.  
However, according to the evidence of record, the applicant was 
on medical turnback status and cannot receive service credit for 
this time since USAFA cadet time is not creditable in a 
commissioned status per USC Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, 
Chapter 49 Section 971, Service Credit.  While the applicant was 
on medical turnback status, he was not serving in any capacity 
and was not physically at the USAFA.  The applicant’s time on 
medical turnback was mistaken as attendance at USAFA Preparatory 
School, which is creditable as enlisted active duty service.  On 
2 Feb 11, the applicant contacted the Air Force Personnel Center 
(DPSIPV) to inform them that he had never attended the USAFA 
Preparatory School.  After USAFA confirmed the applicant had not 
attended the Preparatory School, AFPC/DPSIPV corrected his 
service dates to remove the credit erroneously granted him.  The 
applicant alleges he was not directly notified of the debt he 
incurred as a result of these corrections to his service dates; 
however, during his conversation with the AFPC/DPSIPV staff, the 
applicant would have been informed that the removal of the 
enlisted time would change his TAFMSD, pay date, and the that he 
would possibly incur a debt.  Additionally, his Leave and 
Earning Statements (LES) between Mar 11 and Dec 11 noted the 
debt in the remarks area.  The Mar 11 LES further noted the 
change in his pay date and that the debt repayment had been 
suspended.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 Jun 13 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.

________________________________________________________________

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 with respect 
to the applicant’s requests pertaining to his service dates.  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.  As 
for the portion of his request regarding the debt he incurred, 
we have been advised by SAF/FMP that said debt has been waived.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting any relief beyond that rendered 
administratively.

________________________________________________________________

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-2013-01911 in Executive Session on 8 Apr 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIPV, dated 13 May 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2000-03245

    Original file (BC-2000-03245.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication that the applicant was forced to take advance leave with pay prior to entering the Air Force Academy as a basic cadet. Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Chief Pay Services, HQ USAFA/FMFC, reviewed the application and states that cadets receive advance pay for clothing and equipment purchases. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00847

    Original file (BC-2013-00847.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence which would lead us to believe that at the time of her discharge, a physical condition existed that was determined by competent medical authority to be a physical disability which specifically rendered her unfit for continued military service. However, we note that although the Air Force is required to rate disabilities in accordance with the DVA Schedule for Rating Disabilities, the DVA operates under a totally separate system with a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01390

    Original file (BC 2014 01390.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01390 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. (Administratively Corrected) APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His time at the USAFA from 1966 to 1970 is not reflected on his DD Form 214. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02233

    Original file (BC-2007-02233.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01661

    Original file (BC-2002-01661.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, should the Board approve the relief sought, the record should be corrected to reflect a pay date of 17 Mar 87. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the following legal opinion is provided. Exhibit F. Letter, HQ USAF/JAG, dated 28 Feb 03.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900780

    Original file (9900780.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2007 | BC-2006-02240

    Original file (BC-2006-02240.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-02212

    Original file (BC-2011-02212.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was deficient in both of these requirements necessary to receive a USAFA diploma and be deemed a USAFA graduate. 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 of an error or injustice. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01381

    Original file (BC 2014 01381.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    As a result, his record was corrected to reflect an ADSC expiration date of 23 May 18 for the scholarship program. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He believes his corrected ADSC expiration date is miscalculated for the updated AF Form 63. He agrees with DPSIPVs statement, “if the Boards decision is to grant the relief sought, the record will be adjusted to reflect an ADSC expiration date of 23 May 15.” However, if the Boards decision is to deny relief, he requests his record be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00141

    Original file (BC-2002-00141.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    The three conditions that appeared most problematic were left arm plexopathy, right hip girdle and groin pain, and adjustment disorder. In the summer of 1998 she developed disabling right hip girdle and groin pain associated with an apparent spider bite that continued to prevent her from participating in cadet physical training activities at the time of graduation. The Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAO recommends denial.