RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00821
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her leave that was previously revoked, be restored.  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She is the victim of sexual assault by her previous commander 
and her leave was revoked pending the investigation.  She 
believes there is an injustice because she was ordered not to 
leave the area until further notice by her commander.  

In support of her request the applicant provides copies of an 
email, her Leave and Earnings Statements and a no contact order.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the United States Air Force on 17 May 
90.  She was progressively promoted to the grade of senior 
master sergeant (E-7) and is currently serving on active duty.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  IAW AFI 36-3003, Military Leave 
Program, paragraph 6.1 “Annual Leave.  Another name for annual 
leave is “ordinary” leave.  Normally members request leave, as 
accruing, within mission requirements and other exigencies.  
Member’s failure to use leave, as accruing, can result in loss 
of accrued leave at Fiscal Year (FY)-end leave balancing or upon 
retirement or separation from active duty.”  Additionally, IAW 
paragraph 4.1.2. “…Scheduling leave prevents loss of leave at 
fiscal year (FY)-end balancing, retirement, or separation from 
active duty.  Both management and members share responsibility 
in managing leave balances throughout the FY.”  She is 
responsible for monitoring her leave balance and scheduling with 
management in order to prevent lost leave.  The applicant did 
not schedule leave in a timely manner prior to the end of the 
FY.  Even if her leave was not canceled, she would have still 
gone over her use/lose balance.  

The applicant provides her Leave and Earning Statement (LES) 
which reflects she lost 16 days of leave.  Also included was a 
no contact order dated 5 Sep 13, which informed the applicant 
her ‘place of duty was in her private residence until further 
notice.’ Her Master Military Pay Account (MMPA) reflects 16 lost 
days, cancellation of ordinary leave on five (5) occasions from 
May-Sep, and eight (8) instances of ordinary leave. 

The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit B.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant contends the 16 lost days were due to being 
penalized as reprisal for speaking out against her commander at 
the time; he allegedly committed sexual assault against her.  
She includes a copy of her cancelled deployment orders for which 
she had planned to take leave en route 23-30 Sep 13.  This leave 
would have taken her under the 75 days allowed to carry into the 
FY.  

In further support of her request she provides a letter from the 
Special Victims’ Counsel, Air Force Legal Operations Agency and 
various other documents associated with her request.    

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
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 an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include her 
rebuttal response, in judging the merits of the case; however, 
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale 
as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the 
victim of an error of injustice.  Should the applicant provide 
substantial evidence to show how the alleged sexual assault 
prevented her from taking leave, we may be willing to reconsider 
her application.  In view of the above and in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the requested relief.


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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-00821 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Feb 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 5 Jun 14.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jun 14.
	Exhibit D.  Applicant’s Rebuttal