RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04489
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His 10-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) of 23 Apr
2017 for Undergraduate Flying Training (UPT) be corrected to
reflect 21 Nov 2013, his originally scheduled graduation date
from Specialized Undergraduate Flying Training (SUPT), or in the
alternative, his record be credited with some portion of time
commensurate with losing three years of service while on
administrative hold.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was falsely accused of a crime and removed from training on
8 Oct 2003 to face a court-martial. After three years, the case
was dropped by the convening authority and he was returned to
training the following week. The allegations delayed his
training and derailed his career for over three years. He asks
the Board to remedy this injustice and make him "whole" by
putting him as close to the position he would have been had he
never been placed on administrative hold for over three years.
If his ADSC were revised to what it would have been prior to the
false accusations, he would now be in a position to consider
other career options such as serving in the Air National Guard
or the Air Force Reserve. In addition, he will not be eligible
for the pilot bonus when his peers are because the beginning of
his SUPT ADSC was delayed.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in
the grade of major (O-4).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIP recommends denial. DPSIP states that the applicant
entered the United States Air Force Academy in 1998 as the class
of 2002. On 30 Jul 1998, cadets graduating in 2002 were
informed that they would incur a 10-year ADSC for SUPT, taking
effect upon SUPT completion and award of aeronautical rating.
On 10 Aug 1998, the applicant acknowledged the requirement of
the 10-year commitment. He volunteered for UPT on 12 Mar 2002.
His aeronautical rating was effective 24 Apr 2007, which
resulted in an ADSC of 23 Apr 2017.
The complete DPSIP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit
B.
AFPC/JA recommends denial. JA states that they concur with the
advisory written by AFPC/DPSIP, with respect to the facts and
conclusions regarding the accuracy of the applicant's ADSC for
his SUPT. However, JA states that the applicant does not
dispute that calculation. Rather, he argues that not being
given credit for the three years he was held in a long-term
administrative hold status upon being removed from flying
training to face court-martial charges constitutes an injustice.
JA disagrees with his characterization that "his innocence is no
longer in question," that he "was falsely accused due to no
fault of my own," and that he "fought to clear my name." In
fact, the court-martial never proceeded to adjudication on the
merits; i.e., the applicant was never acquitted of rape and
indecent assault. Rather, the charges were dismissed as the
result of other issues unrelated to the applicant's guilt or
innocence at trial. While JA is not suggesting that he was
convicted of these charges, it is simply not accurate to state
that his innocence is no longer in question or that he fought to
clear his name. In other words, JA is not prepared to conclude
that this time on administrative hold was not without
justification. Consequently, JA recommends that the application
be denied.
The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 6 Nov 2012, copies of the Air Force evaluations were
forwarded to the applicant 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 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 AFPC/DPSIT and adopt its rationale as the basis for our
conclusion 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.
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(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
________________________________________________________________
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 this application
in Executive Session on 20 Jun 2013, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-04489:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Sep 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIP, dated 12 Oct 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 25 Oct 2012.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Nov 2012.
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00812
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00812 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2107, Active Duty Service Commitments, Note 1, The Air Force Academy classes of 1998 and 1999 will incur an ADSC of...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00380
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2007-00380 INDEX NUMBER: 100.07 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 AUG 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) for Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) be changed to an eight-year commitment. It further stated, if the ADSC changed, he would serve...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 04176
On 16 Apr 10, the applicants commander approved the squadron commanders recommendation. He had several delays in beginning his training due to a DUI, a disciplinary issue, and a pending waiver request for an alcohol problem. His initial elimination occurred when all officers eliminated from IST were reclassified regardless of the Air Force requirements and prior to the institution of the current Initial Skills Training (IST) Reclassification Panel process. Also, he believes that he...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00471
He was “forced” to sign the paperwork because if he did not he would fall under the declination statement on AF Form 63, Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) Acknowledgement Statement, which would mean that he would not be allowed to change duty stations and/or complete his pilot training, and possibly be separated from the Air Force. On 21 Apr 99, the applicant signed AF Form 56, Application for Training Leading to a Commission in the United States Air Force. He also signed the...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00937
This exam is required for all students being considered for elimination to ensure students are “medically qualified at the time of any non-medical disenrollment.” As a result, the applicant was to be reinstated into training following a Medical Hold status to resolve the medical issue. At the time of her elimination, there was a policy allowing up to 6 months in Medical Hold before students would be considered for elimination. Then following the 3-month Medical Hold, the Flight Surgeon...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05545
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05545 COUNSEL: NONE INDICATED HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His ten-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) for Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) be declared void. The applicant contends he never signed a service commitment agreement upon entry to initial pilot training. The FY13 ACP program implementation instructions included a criterion that in order to be...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03074
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPAO advises that, since the applicant was selected by his commission source for a pilot slot during FY03 and was subsequently medically disqualified, his pilot slot was awarded to another individual from the list of AFROTC eligibles. We believe the possibility exists that, had the ETP package been forwarded in a timely manner, the applicant may not have lost his FY03 UPT slot. PEGGY E....
It indicates, in part, that the applicant claims he requested (and subsequently was denied) to attend C-141B IQT after having been assigned to XXXX AFB for just 1.5 years in order to “prevent from extending [his] ADSC.” If applicant had been allowed to attend C- 141B IQT at this point in his career (Feb 98), he would have approximately four years and two months left of his UPT ADSC. Applicant believes he was wrong when he stated that applicant “voluntarily requested and accepted the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02866
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was given an assignment to serve as a T-6 Instructor Pilot at Sheppard Air Force Base (AFB), Texas, in April 2010. Upon receiving this assignment he was given an Air Force Personnel Center brief through the Osan Air Base Force Support Squadron (FSS) and Military Personnel Flight (MPF) outbound assignments division. He reported to Sheppard AFB in June 2010 and completed T-6 Pilot Instructor...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01807
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01807 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) be changed from 72 months to 36 months. He received a training Report on Individual Personnel (RIP) and AF Form 63, Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) Acknowledgement Statement, which he agreed to and...