RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00303
		INDEX NUMBER:  113.04

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His two-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) incurred for using Tuition Assistance (TA) to fund graduate coursework at the University of Alaska be deleted.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Knowing that he had a six-year ADSC, he took TA to run concurrently with his Air Force Academy commitment; that unknown to him, the applicable Air Force Instruction (AFI 36-2107) was re-written in June of 2000 stating that the ADSC for service academy graduates is five years; that sometime during his tour at Elmendorf, his ADSC changed from six years to five years, but he was never informed by his Military Personnel Flight (MPF) that his records were changed; and that if he knew his ADSC was five years instead of six years, he wouldn’t have taken TA and incurred another ADSC.  Applicant advises that he is prepared to reimburse the government for the TA received.  His complete statement and documentary evidence submitted in support of his application are included as Attachments 1 through 7 to Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Beginning in 1992, the Air Force programmed a six-year extended active duty (EAD) ADSC for USAFA cadets graduating during or after 1996.  This programmed ADSC never took effect and a five-year ADSC was subsequently published in the 1 Sep 98 version of AFI 36-2107.

EAD ADSC updates in the Personnel Data System (PDS) are automatic and all 1996 USAFA graduates received a six-year ADSC upon graduation.  Because the applicant graduated from the USAFA on 29 May 96, he received the six-year ADSC, thereby obligating him to a period of active duty service through 28 May 2002.

On 30 Sep 97, HQ AFPC performed a mass PDS update reducing the EAD ADSCs of 1996 USAFA graduates from six years to five years.  The applicant’s ADSC was subsequently reduced to 28 May 2001.  There is no evidence of any notification of this reduction to the affected members other than the subsequent revision of AFI 36-2107 on 1 Sep 98.

Applicant used TA to help fund several graduate courses, the most recent of which he completed on 27 Jul 2000.  In accordance with AFI 36-2107, ADSCs and Specified Period of Time Contracts, dated 1 Sep 98 (version in effect at the time member received TA), Table 1.6, Rule 7, applicant incurred a two-year ADSC effective on the course completion.  Because TA ADSCs are served concurrently, his longest ADSC for TA usage obligates him through 26 Jul 2002.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSFO recommends that the application be disapproved.  It indicates, in part, that apparently, the applicant did not verify his EAD ADSC between 1996 and 2000 even though he had ample opportunity to do so.  It should be noted that the Air Force provides a “Notification of Selection for Reassignment” printout to officers selected for assignment; page six of this printout lists all ADSCs on record.  Thus, the applicant had an opportunity to review his ADSCs when notified of his impending reassignment from Ramstein AF to Elmendorf AFB in 1998.  Because this printout is not a matter of official record and is destroyed after 90 days, they cannot provide a copy of the applicant's actual printout from 1998.  However, they have provided a sample printout from another Air Force officer reassigned in 2000 (see Atch 2).

It is Air Force policy that an offer to repay funds expended for educational expense will not void an ADSC if the member has already completed the educational event.  The applicant initialed and signed the form indicating his acknowledgement and agreement of this and other conditions set forth in the form.  Additionally, AFI 36-2107, dated 1 Sep 98, supports this position by stating, “there is no ‘buy out’ provision authorized from a completed ADSC‑incurring event.”

In closing, HQ AFPC/DPSFO states that lack of notification for the changed EAD ADSC, while regrettable, does not negate the validity of the TA ADSC.  It is unreasonable for a member to expect the Air Force to allow him to void a valid, mutually agreed upon ADSC based on a stated intention to never serve beyond a certain date (Exhibit C with Attachments 1 and 2).

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the advisory opinion was made available to the applicant on April 6, 2001, for review and comment in accordance with established policy (Exhibit D); however, to date, he has failed to respond.
___________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of a probable error or an injustice warranting favorable action on the applicant’s request.  Applicant contends that, knowing that he had a six-year ADSC, he took TA to run concurrently with his Air Force Academy commitment; that unknown to him, the applicable AFI was re-written in June 2000 stating that the ADSC for service Academy graduates is five years; that sometime during his tour at Elmendorf AFB, his ADSC changed from six years to five years, but he was never informed by his MPF that his records were changed; and that if he knew his ADSC was five years instead of six years, he would not have taken TA and incurred another ADSC.  He also states that he’s prepared to reimburse the government for the TA received.  The applicant’s intent to separate upon completion of the Academy ADSC is corroborated by his commander for the past two years.

4.  The Air Force recommends denial notwithstanding the failure to notify the applicant of the change in his Academy ADSC from six years to five years.  It is believed that it is unreasonable for a member to expect the Air Force to allow him to void a valid, mutually agreed upon ADSC based on a stated intention to never serve beyond a certain date.  They assert that the applicant did not verify his ADSC between 1996 and 2000 even though he had ample opportunity to do so.  In addition, it is Air Force policy that an offer to repay funds expended for educational expenses will not void an ADSC if the member has already completed the educational event.  Contrary to the assertion made by the Air Force, the applicant states (and we have no reason to question this statement) that upon graduation from the Academy in 1996 and being informed of a six-year ADSC, he received official confirmation of the commitment in 1997. Later on, after becoming aware that a former classmate received a five-year ADSC, he checked with his MPF in Germany, but was shown a copy of the applicable AFI, dated 6 July 1994, which still reflected a six-year Academy ADSC.

5.  Since the applicant’s six-year Academy ADSC was apparently officially confirmed on more than one occasion, it was not unreasonable for him to assume that he had no need to continuously verify this particular ADSC.  Moreover, in our view, given the potential impact of such a significant change in ADSC length on an officer’s career goals, it is incredulous that responsible Air Force officials would not believe that they had, at least a moral obligation, to ensure that the officers affected be timely notified of the change.  The fact that this was not done, in our view, constitutes an egregious injustice warranting corrective action.
___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the two-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) he incurred for using Tuition Assistance (TA) to help fund several graduate courses (the most recent of which he completed on 27 July 2000) be declared void; and that he be permitted to reimburse the government for the funds expended as an exception to Air Force policy.

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 29 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

Panel Chair
Member
Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSFO, dated 28 Mar 01, w/atch.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 Apr 01.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-00303

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to [APPLICANT], be corrected to show that the two-year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) he incurred for using Tuition Assistance (TA) to help fund several graduate courses (the most recent of which he completed on 27 July 2000) be, and hereby is, declared void; and that he be permitted to reimburse the government for the funds expended as an exception to Air Force policy.
:

                                                                           
                                                                           Director
                                                                           Air Force Review Boards Agency