DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 

WASHINGTON,  DC 

AUG  2 7  

I 
I 

Office of the Assistant Secretary 

AFBCMR 97-02724 

I 

h 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF 

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction 
of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United  States Code (70A 
Stat 116), it is directed that: 

s  of  the  Department  of  the  Air  Force  relating  to 
e  corrected  to  show  that  competent  authority  approved  his 
e provisions of AFI 36-3208, paragraph 3.2, Hardship, effective 

7 

29 January 1999. 

Y 

Air Force Review Boards Agency 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-02724 

AUG  2 7  i998 

COUNSEL:  None 

HEARING DESIRED:  No 

APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: 

His  grade  at-  time of  enlistment  into  the  Air  Force be  changed 
from  senior airman  (E-4) to  staff  sergeadt  (E-5); or,  in  the 
alternative, he be released from his current enlistment contract. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

He was previously a staff sergeant in the Air Force Reserve and 
at the time he was recruited f o r  active duty, he was promised the 
grade  of  staff  ,sergeant  by  the  recruiter. 
The  grade 
determination  stated  by  the  recruiter  was  based  on  the 
requirement  contained  in  AFR  33-3,  Table  3-2, Note  2.  The 
minimum  Total Active  Federal Military  Service  (TAFMS) required 
for entry from the Reserve to active duty was three years.  The 
recruiter should have been aware the requirement was changed to 
five  years  and  six  months  in  accordance  with  AFI  36-2002, 
Attachment  4.  This confusion in policy placed him  in a no-win 
situation.  He could not refuse to enter active duty since 
no 
longer had  employment qr a home  to which to  return. 
ot 
afford to remain on active duty in his current grade an  meet his 
financial requirements. 

P 

Applicant's complete submission, including a  statement from-the 
recruiter, is attachedrat Exhibit A. 

I 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

On  24  Jul  95, the  applicant  was  released  from  the  Air  Force 
Reserve  under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-3203  (Completion  of 
Required  Active  Duty Training)  in the  grade of  staff  sergeant. 
He  was  credited  with  4 years,  1 month, and  2 6   days  of  active 
service and 4 years, 10 months, and 12 days of inactive service. 

On  28 Apr  97, the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular Air  Force 
(RegAF) for  a  period  of  four  years  in  the  grade  of  sergeant 

(E-4), effective, and with a date of rank  (DOR) of 28 Apr 97.  He 
is currently serving on active duty in the grade of sergeant. 

AFBCMR 97-02724 

On  28  Apr  97,  applicant  signed  AF  Form  3007,  Section  11, 
Acknowledgment and Review on Date of Enlistment, which states, in 
part,  '
  .I fully  understand  that  ANY  PROMISE  MADE  BY  ANYONE 
(ORAL or WRITTEN) TO ME THAT IS NOT IDENTIFIED ON THIS FORM WILL 
NOT BE HONORED BY THE AIR FORCE.  My  initials in paragraphs that 
apply to me  and my  signature below  constitute my  UNDERSTANDING 
AND ACCEPTANCE OF THIS ENLISTMENT AGREEMENT." 

I

.

.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The  Chief, Skills Management  Branch, AFPCbPPAE,  reviewed  this 
application  and  indicated  that  the  provisions  of the  current 
Prior  Service  Grade  Determination  policy  authorize  specific 
enlistment grades based  on minimum  TAFMS  requirements.  At  the 
time of the applicant's 28 Apr  97 enlistment, he had  five years 
and one day of TAFMS.  Since he  did not meet  the minimum TAFMS 
requirements for enlistment grade E-5  (five years, six months) , 
the  applicant  was  authorized  enlistment  grade  of  E-4.  This 
provision is included on the Enlistment Agreement, AF Form 3007, 
Section I, Item A, which the applicant acknowledged on the date 
of  his  enlistment.  Applicant's enlistment in the RegAF  in pay 
grade E-4, effective, and with a DOR of 28 Apr 97, is correct and 
in  compliance  with  policy. 
DPPAE  recommends  denial  of 
applicant's request for enlistment grade correction. 
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is 
attached at Exhibit C. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and indicated that he 
understands  that  he  did  not  have  eno 
AFMS  under  the  new 
attention until  the 
regulations but  it was  not brought  to 
fact been 
enlistment  that  the  rec 
actual dat 
this time 
old AFR 33-3C1. 
quoting to 
that he  ha 
had  quit 
their  jobs 
eps to go 
to the rank of  sergeant and the 
from the ran 
loss of  a large cut in pay. 
feels that he was misled by the 
recruiter who was negligent 
not keeping up  to  date with  the 
changes in AFR 33-3C1.  Having taken all the steps to begin a new 
life, his only choice was  to reenlist at  the  rank of  sergeant, 
which was given him on the day of enlistment. 

house  and both 
not have  risked 

staff serge 

Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit E. 

2 

AFBCMR 97-02724 

Applicant submitted two statements indicating he would like to be 
honorably discharged  from active duty not later than 29 January 
1999  due  to  financial  reasons  as  well  as  the  need  to  attend 
school in order to prepare for transition into the civilian work 
force (Exhibit F). 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

1.  The  applicant  has  exhausted  all  remedies  provided  by 
existing law or regulations. 

2.  The application was timely filed. 

'I 

3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After 
thoroughly reviewing the evidence submitted, we are not persuaded 
that  applicant's  enlistment  grade  should  be  changed. 
His 
contentions concerning being promised a higher enlistment grade 
are duly noted; however, we  find insufficient evidence that the 
recruiter miscounseled applicant regarding his enlistment grade. 
It appears that there was some doubt regarding whether applicant 
would qualify for the higher e 
tment grade.  Although it may 
have  initially  appeared  that 
would  meet  the  eligibility 
criteria  for the grade of  sta 
rgeant, it was not until his 
enlistment day that his entry grade was determined.  We note the 
statement  from  applicant's recruiter  indicating  that  applicant 
did not know for a fact what  grade he  would be  entering active 
duty  prior  to  his  enlistment  date. 
In  accordance  with  the 
policies in effect at the time of his enlistment, it appears he 
was  enlisted  in  the  appropriate  grade. 
Clearly,  applicant 
understood the terms of his enlistment contract, as evidenced by 
his signature on the enlistment contract, acknowledging 
grade 
as an E-4.  In view of the foregoing, we find no compelling basis 
upon  which  to  change  applicant's  grade  at  the  time  of  his 
enlistment. 
4.  Notwithstanding the above, we believe some form of relief is 
warranted.  In this respect, we note that applicant sold- 
home 
spouse terminated their civilian employment 
fully believing 
ad sufficient total active federal military 
service to qualify for the higher enlistment grade.  However, as 
a result of a change in policy, this was not the case as he was 
nearly six months short of qualifying  for the higher grade.  At 
that point, he  obviously felt he had  no choice but  to  enter in 
the  lower grade, thereby creating a  financial hardship  for his 
family.  Applicant indicates that he wishes to pursue a civilian 
career but needs to complete schooling before being qualified for 
the position he  seeks.  The school he  wishes  to attend doesn't 
Normally  we  would  recommend 
commence  until  February  1999. 

and both e and 

AFBCMR  97-02724 

approval of  his  request  to be  discharged and make  it effective 
immediately; however,  we  are  persuaded  that  that  would  create 
another burden  on  applicant  and  his  family.  Therefore, in  an 
effort  to  prevent  any  further  hardship  to  applicant  and  his 
family, we recommend that his records be corrected to the extent 
indicated below.  Applicant's request to be honorably discharged 
was  duly noted; however, it  is inappropriate for this Board  to 
speculatively  direct  the  characterization  of  applicant's 
discharge.  We  do not believe  this authority should be  usurped 
from the discharge authority. 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

The pertinent military records of the Deparpment of the Air Force 
relating  to  APPLICANT,  be  corrected  to  show  that  competent 
authority  approved  his  request  to  be  discharged  under  the 
provisions  of  AFI  3 6 - 3 2 0 8 ,   paragraph  3 . 2 ,   Hardship, effective 
2 9   January 1 9 9 9 .  

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive  Session on  1 4   July  1 9 9 8   and  3 1   July  1 9 9 8 ,   under  the 
provisions of AFI 3 6 - 2 6 0 3 :  

Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Panel Chair 
Mr. Loren S .   Perlstein, Member 
Mr. Dana J. Gilmour, Member 
Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner  (without vote) 

All  members voted  to  correct the  records, as recommended.  The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 1 4 9 ,   dated 1 8   Aug 9 7 .  
Exhibit B. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 7  Nov 9 7 .  
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 4   Nov 9 7 .  
Exhibit E.  Letter from applicant, dated 2 2   Dec 9 7 .  
Exhibit F.  Fax statements from applicant, dated 3 0   Jul 9 8  
n 

and 6  Aug 9 8 .  

Panel Chairi/ 

. 

* 

DEPARTMENT O F  THE AIR  F O R C E  

HEADQUARTERS AIR  FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER 

RANDOLPH AIR F O R C E  BASE TEXAS 

U.S. AIR FORCE B 

MEMORANDUM FOR  AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPAE 

550 C Street West, Ste 10 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 12 

SUBJECT: 

‘07  NOV I997 

1 9 4 7  -  199‘7 

The applicant requests change of enlistment grade from P A  (E-4) to SSgt (E-5) based 

on grade held upon discharge from the Air Force Reserve, and the contention he was 
miscounseled by his recruiter. 

The provisions of the current Prior Service Grade Determination policy authorize 

specific enlistment grades based on minimum TAFMS requirements.  At the time of his 
28 Apr 97 enlistment, applicant had five years and one day of TAFMS.  Since he did not meet 
the minimum TAFMS requirements for enlistment grade E-5 (five years, six months), applicant 
was authorized enlistment grade E-4.  This provision is included on the Enlistment Agreement, 
AF Form 3007, Section I, Item A, which applicant acknowledged on date of enlistment. 

Applicant’s enlistment in the RegAF in pay grade E-4, effective and with DOR 

28 Apr 97, is correct and in compliance with policy.  We recommend denial of member’s request 

.  for enlistment grade correction. 

Chief, SkilkMana&fknt Branch 
Dir of Pers Program Management