RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04388 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He be reinstated in the Air Force as a first lieutenant (1Lt) or an enlisted airman. 2. The recoupment of his Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps (AFROTC) scholarship be waived. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His discharge was unjust. The way he has been treated has negatively impacted him and the Air Force, and has set a dangerous precedent for future pilot students who have doubts about their career in aviation. While attending Initial Flight Screening (IFS) he started doubting his decision to attend pilot training. After graduating from and starting his Undergraduate Pilot Training (UPT) he realized his interests did not align with a career in aviation. He believes he would better serve the Air Force in another Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) that was not related to aviation. After speaking with his superiors, he decided to self-eliminate from pilot training. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 26 Aug 10, the applicant received a scholarship from the Air Force to participate in the AFROTC program at Valdosta State University. On 2 Mar 11, his AFROTC contract was amended to change his officer categorization to pilot. On 5 May 12, the applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant (O-1). The applicant self-eliminated prior to the start of his pilot training. On 18 Jan 13, the applicant requested to be retained and reclassified into another career field. On 14 Feb 13, the Initial Skills Training (IST) reclassification panel considered the applicant’s request and recommended he be discharged in lieu of reclassification and directed he reimburse the government for the unserved portion of the commitment he incurred due to the cost expended on his education. On 18 Apr 13, the applicant was honorably discharged and credited with 11 months and 10 days of total active service. The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIP recommends denial of the portion of the applicant’s request for reinstatement into the Air Force. Air Force officers who are eliminated from their IST, regardless of whether self-initiated, before or after training commences, to include initial training declination, will be considered for reclassification contingent on current Air Force requirements. The applicant was considered for retention and reclassification by the IST panel; however, the panel recommended the applicant be discharged. In addition, the panel considered recoupment of the pro-rata portion of his AFROTC scholarship associated with the unserved portion of his active duty service commitment (ADSC) associated with the scholarship. Per Title 10 USC, Section 2005 requires recoupment of the pro-rata share of the unearned portion of his scholarship as a result of his inability to complete the ADSC for his education. The only way recoupment may be waived is if the inability to complete his ADSC is deemed beyond his control. The applicant self-eliminated from training and both the IST panel and discharge authority determined his inability to complete his ADSC was completely within his control. Therefore, the Air Force is legally required to direct recoupment of the pro-rata share of the scholarship representing the unserved portion of his ADSC. The applicant can apply to the Secretary of the Air Force Remission Board (SAFRB) for remission of his debt to Air Force. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIP evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: According to AFPAM 36-2407, Applicant’s Guide to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), the burden is on the applicant to explain what happened and why it is an error or injustice. Although, AFPC/DPSIP correctly stated the IST panel acted without error from an administrative standpoint, they failed to address that the board does not simply consider administrative errors, but seeks remedy to incidents of injustice. Although his initial request stated why he believes his involuntary discharge was unjust, and he provided a supporting statement from his current squadron commander indicating that his discharge was unjust and that it had a negative impact on the Air Force, AFPC/DPSIP did not address the injustice aspect of his involuntary separation. While arguments were provided on the procedural validity of the IST panel, there were no arguments on the substance of the IST panel’s decision. He asks the Board to treat AFPC/DPSIP omission as a concession to the merits of his argument concerning the injustice of his involuntary separation. His decision to request reclassification was based on the advice and recommendations from his superiors and his commitment to the Core Values of the Air Force. He has not broken any rules or committed any crimes that would make him ineligible to serve in the Air Force. He is physically fit, healthy, and motivated to serve. He has a track record of excellence. The only reason he is not serving in the Air Force is the IST panel decided not to use him for an existing vacant position for which he is qualified. He did not file an appeal through the Air Force Remissions Board because his notification for his involuntary discharge indicated he should appeal through the AFBCMR. He has paid back the Air Force for the scholarship and would like to be reimbursed for the payment. Since his initial request he has enlisted with the Air Force Reserve. This demonstrates his commitment to the Air Force and shows the Air Force is benefitting from the AFROTC education he received. The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has not 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. The applicant argues that his inability to be reclassified and subsequent involuntary discharge makes him the victim of an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission, to include his rebuttal statement, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the 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. The applicant concedes there was no administrative error regarding his elimination and the subsequent denial of his reclassification request, but argues that relief should be granted because he is the victim of an injustice. However, other than his own assertions, he has not presented any evidence that would convince us that he was treated differently than other similarly situated individuals. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. In regards to the portion of the applicant’s request for waiver of the recoupment his debt for his AFROTC scholarship; we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. The Air Force office of primary responsibility has reviewed this application and indicated there is an available avenue of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. In view of this, we find this aspect of the applicant’s request is not ripe for adjudication at this level, as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 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-2013-04388 in Executive Session on 2 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04388 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Oct 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIP, dated 10 Mar 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 14. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated.