RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-01327

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
	
	HEARING:  YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His enlistment bonus repayment debt be invalidated in accordance with Department of Defense Regulation 7000.14-R, Financial Management Regulation, Volume 7A, Chapter 2, paragraph 020303. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Counsel, on behalf of the applicant, contends the applicant’s inability to maintain his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was due to circumstances outside of his control.  He took the required polygraph on four separate occasions, never passing or failing, but receiving inconclusive results each time.  While this resulted in the applicant’s disqualification from his AFSC, his commander wrote a memo of support stating the test results were outside of the applicant’s control and recommending him for retraining.

Due to the withdrawal of the applicant’s AFSC, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) created a debt to recoup a prorated portion of his enlistment bonus.  Upon seeking counsel from his local finance office, 55th Comptroller Squadron (55 CPTS), the applicant was told he needed to file a remission action to contest the debt.  It was only after the remission request was denied that the applicant was informed of his right to contest the validity of the debt.  At that time, a 55 CPTS representative told him he could not contest the debt since he had already submitted a remission action.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a currently serving Air Force Staff Sergeant.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2LT recommends denying the application.  The applicant was disqualified from his AFSC because he could not pass a polygraph examination, which is a retention requirement as listed in the Air Force Enlisted Classification Directory.  Upon his disqualification, a determination was made to recoup the prorated portion of his enlistment bonus in accordance with Department of Defense 7000.14-R, Financial Management Regulation, Volume 7A, Chapter 2, Table 2-1, Rule 9..  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBB determined the applicant has not exhausted all administrative avenues of non-judicial relief prior to applying to the Board.  The Remissions Board found no extenuation or mitigation to warrant remission based upon impropriety or inequity, and the applicant did not submit an appeal to that decision.  However, given the lengthy timelines, SAF/MRBB recommends the Board consider the application despite the applicant’s failure to exhaust the Remissions Board appeal process.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 15 May 18 for comment (Exhibit E), and the applicant’s counsel replied on 12 Jun 18.  Counsel, on behalf of the applicant, stated the advisories did not address the applicant’s claim.  The applicant was not appealing a remission action, but instead, was contesting the validity of the debt.  The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant did not exhaust all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.  The Board does not consider applications without documentation showing exhaustion of such avenues of relief.  However, in its advisory, SAF/MRBB recommended, given the lengthy timelines, the Board accept the case though the applicant did not request an appeal via the Remissions Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion the applicant is the victim of an error and injustice.  While the Board notes the comments of AFPC/DP2LT indicating relief should be denied, the Board believes a preponderance of the evidence substantiates the applicant’s contentions.  Loss of AFSC due to unsuccessful polygraph was outside the applicant’s control.  Additionally, the applicant was miscounseled regarding actions required to contest the validity of the debt prior to requesting remission.  Therefore, the Board recommends correcting the applicant’s records as indicated below.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show competent authority directed that he was not required to reimburse the government for his enlistment bonus, and directed the return of any portion of that enlistment bonus that had already been recouped.

The application was adjudicated without a personal appearance.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-01327 in Executive Session on 10 Jul 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 29 Mar 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2LT, dated 6 Sep 16.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, SAF/MRBB, dated 9 May 18.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 15 May 18.
Exhibit F:	Applicant’s response, dated 12 Jun 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.