RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02148
            INDEX NUMBER:  131.04
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank and effective date  of  promotion  to  the  grade  of
senior airman (SrA) be changed from 11 May 1998 to 28 February 1998.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was supposed to  be  promoted  (to  the  grade  of  SrA  (E-4))  on
28 February 1998, at his three-year mark.  This did not happen because
he was placed on administrative hold on  29  September  1997  until  1
January 1998 pending an investigation.  His  retraining  was  canceled
because of this action.  He was scheduled to  go  to  tech  school  in
October 1997, with a graduation date of  December  1997,  which  would
have given him his “3” skill level and removed his PES Code “Q.”   The
investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing.

In support of his request, applicant provided  two  Incident/Complaint
Reports; a letter of reprimand, which was subsequently withdrawn;  and
documentation  associated  with  the   administrative   hold   action,
cancellation of his retraining and  cancellation  of  his  assignment.
(Exhibit A)

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 March 1995, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force,  in  the
grade of airman basic (E-1), for a period of four years.  He currently
has an established date of separation of 28 February 1999.

The Personnel Data  System  (PDS)  reflects  that  the  applicant  has
received  two  Enlisted  Performance  Reports  (EPRs)   with   overall
evaluation ratings of “4.”

Applicant’s grade history, extracted from the  PDS,  reflects  he  was
promoted to the grade of  airman  (E-2),  with  a  date  of  rank  and
effective date of 2 Sep 95; airman first class (E-3), effective 2 July
1996; and, senior airman (E-4), effective 11 May 1998.
___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Enlisted  Promotion  &  Military  Testing  Branch,   AFPC/DPPPWB,
reviewed this application and recommended denial.  Their comments,  in
part, follow.

DPPPWB stated the basic eligibility criteria for promotion  to  senior
airman (SrA) is not be ineligible for any of the reasons  outlined  in
AFI 36-2502, Table 1.1, possess a Primary  Air  Force  Specialty  Code
(PAFSC) at the 3-Skill Level, be  recommended  for  promotion  by  the
commander, and have 36 months total active  military  service  (TAFMS)
and 20 months time-in-grade (TIG)  as  an  airman  first  class  (both
criteria must be satisfied), or have 28 months TIG as an airman  first
class (A1C).  The applicant would not have had 28 months TIG until  28
Nov 98, well after completion of 36 months TAFMS and  20  months  TIG,
which would have been completed 2 March 1998.  Although  he  completed
36 months TAFMS on 1 March 1998, he did not  complete  20  months  TIG
until 2 March 1998 (DOR to A1C was 2 July  1996).   Consequently,  the
earliest he could have been promoted to  senior  airman  was  2  March
1998, providing he  had  the  appropriate  3-skill  level  PAFSC,  was
recommended by the commander and not  have  been  ineligible  for  the
reasons in AFI 36-2502, Table 1.1.

DPPPWB noted applicant’s contention that  if  he  had  graduated  from
technical school in December 1997, he would have  been  awarded  a  3-
skill level which would have removed his Promotion Eligibility  Status
(PES) Code “Q.”  PES Code “Q” identifies a member whose AFSC has  been
withdrawn for reasons within  his/her  control  and  is  an  automatic
ineligible for promotion condition in  accordance  with  AFI  36-2501.
The member remains ineligible for promotion until an AFSC  is  awarded
at the 3-skill level.  Applicant was promoted to SrA on  11 May  1998,
the same date he was upgraded to the 3-skill level.  DPPPWB is  unable
to determine  from  the  documentation  provided  if  the  reason  the
applicant lost his initial AFSC was because of the  investigation  and
the adverse actions taken against him.  He did not  provide  a  letter
from his commander with the circumstances surrounding the loss of  his
AFSC or a letter of support for an earlier promotion date to SrA.   In
the absence of documentation to the contrary, DPPPWB found  no  reason
to believe the applicant was not promoted on the correct date.

The complete 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 7
September 1998 for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

___________________________________________________________________
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 probable error or injustice.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling 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 probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 28 January 1999, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Member
      Mr. Kenneth L. Reinertson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Jul 98, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Microfiche Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 17 Aug 98, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 7 Sep 98.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair