ADDUNDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  95-01615
            INDEX NUMBER:  128.05
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His zone  A,  multiple  two  Selective  Reenlistment  Bonus  (SRB),
received in conjunction with his 13  April  1995  reenlistment,  be
computed on four years of service, rather than three years.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior to reenlisting, he was repeatedly told that he would be  paid
a reenlistment bonus for zone A, multiple two, based on four  years
and 0 months even though he was reenlisting one year before the end
of his first enlistment.  When he  asked  if  his  bonus  would  be
penalized for reenlisting early, he was told that first-term airmen
are exempt from that penalty.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  his   personal
statement and a copy of his 13  April  1995  reenlistment  contract
(Exhibit A).

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 March 1992, the applicant contracted his  initial  enlistment
in the Regular Air Force for a period of four (4) four  years.   He
had an established date of separation of 26 March 1996.

He reenlisted on 13 April 1995 for a period of four (4) years, with
an established date of separation of 12 April 1999.  At the time he
reenlisted, he was entitled to a zone A,  multiple  two,  Selective
Reenlistment  Bonus.   The  enlistment  contract  provided  by  the
applicant reflects that he would be paid a  zone  A,  multiple  2.0
bonus based on 4 years and 0 months of continued service.

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) reflects
that the applicant enlisted in the Air National  Guard  on  29  May
1998 for a period of one year.

___________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  BCMR/Special  Actions  Section,  AFMPC/DPPAES,  reviewed  this
application and recommended denial of applicant’s request.   DPPAES
stated  Section   IIID   (Certification   by   Members   Authorized
Reenlistment  Bonus)  of  applicant’s  AF  Form  901  (Reenlistment
Eligibility Annex to DD Form 4) incorrectly reflects  his  zone  A,
multiple two SRB was based on four  years  of  service  instead  of
three.  Since the applicant had approximately one year of  unserved
time left on his previous enlistment when he reenlisted, 12  months
of obligated service were correctly deducted from his SRB.  He  was
paid the SRB for three years of service.  Based  on  the  incorrect
information reflected on the  AF  Form  901,  it  is  apparent  the
applicant was miscounseled.  Nevertheless, Title 37, United  States
Code, Section 308, calls for any unserved time left on the previous
enlistment to be deducted from the current term of reenlistment  in
computing the bonus payment.

DPPAES further  stated  that  if  the  Board  believes  applicant’s
request  warrants  relief,  they  could  void  his  13  April  1995
reenlistment.  However, if the reenlistment  is  voided,  applicant
would have to forfeit  all  SRB  monies  received.   If  the  Board
elected to void his reenlistment, DPPAES would reinstate his Career
Job Reservation with its original expiration date of 1 August  1995
which would allow the applicant to either reenlist not  later  than
1 August 1995 or separate on his previous  date  of  separation  of
26 March 1996.  DPPAES noted  that  if  the  applicant  elected  to
reenlist prior to his CJR expiration,  eight  months  of  obligated
service would be deducted from his SRB instead of 12.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

Examiner’s Note:  By letter dated 10 April 1996, the applicant  was
asked if he would he accept a reenlistment date of  27  March  1996
for a period of four years rather  than  the  1  August  1995  date
suggested in the advisory opinion, should the Board determine  that
corrective action was warranted.  No response was received from the
applicant nor was the letter returned as undeliverable.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Staff evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 31 July 1995 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.   After
careful consideration of the applicant’s  complete  submission,  we
believe that the applicant may have been miscounseled regarding the
computation   of   his   Selective   Reenlistment   Bonus    (SRB).
Nevertheless, the statute governing reenlistment  bonuses  requires
that any unserved obligated service be subtracted from the  current
term of reenlistment when computing bonuses.   In  this  case,  the
applicant had approximately one year of unserved obligated  service
from his previous enlistment; therefore, he  was  not  entitled  to
receive the full four year SRB payment.  Applicant was advised that
the only way to provide the requested relief would be to show  that
he reenlisted on 27 March 1996 for a period of four  years,  rather
than 13 April 1995.  However, he did not respond to inquiries as to
whether he would be willing to accept the later reenlistment  date.
In view of the foregoing, and in the absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we  conclude  that  there  is  no  basis  upon  which  to
recommend favorable action on the applicant’s request.
___________________________________________________________________

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 15 September 1998 and 6 April 1999, under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Mr. Allen Beckett, Member
      Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Apr 95, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFMPC/DPPAES, dated 5 Jul 95.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Jul 95.
    Exhibit E.  Letters, AFBCMR, dated 10 Apr 96 and
                1 Oct 98.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair