RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02284 

 

 COUNSEL: NO 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Six days of leave be restored to his leave balance. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

During an Air Force review of Department of Defense Instruction 
(DoDI) 1327.06, Leave and Liberty Policy and Procedures, it was 
discovered that AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, was not in 
compliance with DoD policy which states: “For leave starting on 
a non-duty day, the day of departure shall be charged as a day 
of leave. For leave ending on a non-duty day, the day of return 
shall not be charged as a day of leave.” 

 

He should not have been charged leave for the following days: 

 

 9 Aug 09 

 7 Mar 10 

20 Jun 10 

17 Jul 10 

 1 Aug 10 

23 Oct 10 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his 
leave balances from leave web, a listing of the days that should 
be reinstated and a statement from his supervisor. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade 
of Chief Master Sergeant (E-9). 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this appeal are 
contained in the advisory opinion from the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility at Exhibit B. 

________________________________________________________________ 

 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. AFI 36-3003 was revised to 
correct the discrepancy between the DODI and the AFI. However, 
AF/JAA has opined the prior version of AFI 36-3003 was lawful in 
spite of its inconsistency with DoDI. Many members made leave 
plans based on the rules in effect at the time in order to make 
the best use of their leave. An adjustment would have to 
justify the members past intent to determine how past plans 
would have changed under different leave rules. 

 

The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit B. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The Air Force wrongly applied the DoD intent on how leave is to 
be charged. AF/JAA implies that the retroactive adjustments 
should not be made because it is too difficult. The BCMR is the 
right way to make corrections, so it is not too difficult. He 
has proven he was charged leave for non-duty days. He asks the 
Board to review the facts presented and make the correct 
decision based on the system provided, not on the “it’s too hard 
to correct” statement. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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. We note the 
applicant’s contention that the current leave rules be applied 
and he be restored six days of leave. However, the prior 
version of AFI 36-3003 was the policy in effect at the time of 
his leave. Accordingly, he is not authorized or entitled to 
have his leave balance adjusted as requested. 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 that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
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-2011-02284 in Executive Session on 19 January 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, 27 Jul 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit D. Applicant’s Response, dated 29 Aug 11, w/atchs.