RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03316 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The recoupment of monies expended on his undergraduate pilot training (UPT) be waived. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should not be subjected to recoupment of monies because he was willing to fulfill his obligation by serving in the Air Force in any specialty that was available. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of documents extracted from his military personnel records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 12 Aug 03, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force. He was accepted in a commissioning program and was commissioned as a second lieutenant 26 May 10. He entered extended active duty to complete pilot training. The applicant received an Article 15 for operating a vehicle while drunk. He was eliminated from pilot training on 24 Jan 11 for misconduct. The applicant requested reclassification consideration and on 30 Mar 11, the designated authority for the initial skills training elimination reclassification and discharge authority recommended the applicant be discharged with recoupment of the pro rata share of the monies the government expended for his pilot training. He was honorably discharged on 18 Jun 11. He was credited with 8 years, 7 months and 19 days of active service. In accordance with Title 10 USC Section 630, AFI 36-3207, AFGM 1 dated 13 April 2010, and AFPCI 36-112, the Air Force reviews reclassification applications following initial skills training elimination through a formal panel process. The Secretary of the Air Force designated AFPC/CC as the initial skills training elimination reclassification and discharge authority. A panel of senior officers at the Air Force Personnel Center reviews all initial skills training elimination reclassification applications and recommends reclassification or discharge based upon Air Force requirements, commander recommendations, and officer skills and desires. Furthermore, reclassification is not a right. The inability to fulfill active duty service commitments associated with education-related scholarships or Air Force Academy attendance is tied to the Air Force requirement the individual was commissioned and accessed to fill. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIP recommends denial noting recoupment of the pro-rata portion of the applicant’s unserved active duty service commitment is required by law unless waived by the Secretary of the Air Force. Waivers for recoupment are based upon whether the officer was in control of his ability to complete the active duty service commitment. The applicant was eliminated from pilot training based on misconduct and not the disapproval for IST reclassification. The complete HQ AFPC/DPSIP evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant believes the punishment he received for his single act of misconduct has gone well beyond what was right or just. His single act of misconduct was in no way more egregious than other forms of misconduct seen on the base. Even some in leadership have admitted to succumbing to the same mistake in the early days of their career. He accepted his punishment and removal from UPT, but does not believe this single mistake of character was an indication of his ability to be an officer or a pilot. There are several officers who committed this same act of misconduct, but because they have their pilot-wings, and are more of an "asset”, did not receive the same punishment. He was punished for his misconduct, but was not offered a chance to learn from his single mistake. His single act of misconduct has been a burden financially and emotionally He believes he is a victim because there was no precedent set for his misconduct and his future was solely at the discretion of leadership. The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit E. ____________________________________________________________ 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 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 primary basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant's contentions are duly noted; however, we note the applicant’s elimination from pilot training and reclassification request was considered and denied due to his misconduct and inability to fulfill his active duty service commitment. Although the applicant alleges he has been treated unfairly as compared to others similarly situated, we do not find the evidence he has presented sufficient to support his assertion. 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 that 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-2011-03316 in Executive Session on 12 Apr 12 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03316 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Aug 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Military Personnel Records. Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPSIP, dated 23 Sep 11. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Oct 11. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Oct 11.