RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02974

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His military pay record be corrected to reflect that he did not receive a mid-month payment for October 2008 in the amount of $4,567.57 and he be reimbursed for the incurred debt in the same amount.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He never received the October 2008 mid-month payment but he has repaid the incurred debt and should be reimbursed.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 27 Sep 90.

On 9 Jun 08, the applicant pled not guilty and was found guilty of one specification of false official statement, one specification of unprofessional relationship, one specification of indecent assault, one specification of wrongfully soliciting a false statement, one specification of fraternization, and two specifications of wrongfully and willfully attempting to engage in unprofessional relationships in violation of Articles 107, 133, 134, and an additional violation of Article 133, respectively, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  He was sentenced at a General Court-Martial to a Dismissal and reprimand.

On 12 Sep 08, the General Court-Martial convening authority approved the sentence, except for the dismissal and directed the applicant to take leave pending completion of appellate review of the conviction.

According to the LES provided by the applicant, covering the period of 1 Oct 08 through 31 Oct 08, he received a mid-month pay deposit in the amount of $4,567.57.

On 30 Jan 14, the Secretary of the Air Force disapproved the applicant’s retirement application, approved the sentence and executed the dismissal.

On 21 Feb 14, the applicant received a dismissal with an uncharacterized character of service, and a narrative reason for separation of court-martial (other).  He was credited with 23 years, 4 months, and 25 days of total active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DFAS/IN recommends denial indicating the applicant has not exhausted all administrative actions and he should contact the finance office at his last duty station.  Additionally, according to the applicant’s Master Military Pay Account (MMPA), he was issued payment to his USAA account and no payment was returned by the financial institute.

A complete copy of the DFAS/IN evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 Mar 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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.  We took careful notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we do not find that he has been the victim of an error or injustice.  We note that DFAS/IN indicates the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief, and states the applicant should contact his last duty station. We note the Board normally insists on exhaustion of subordinate administrative review before providing relief.  However, given the length of time since his separation and being mindful of administrative economy, we reviewed the applicant’s request and as noted by DFAS, he has not provided sufficient evidence to show that the payment issued to his account was returned by his financial institution.  Should the applicant provide such evidence, we may be willing to reconsider his request.  In view of the foregoing, we conclude the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, 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-2015-02974 in Executive Session on 20 Sep 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Jun 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, DFAS/IN, dated 11 Mar 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 Mar 16.