RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-03003
            INDEX NUMBER:  113.04
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His military personnel record correctly reflect a  one-year  Active
Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) for  C-27  training  at  Howard  AB,
Panama.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was told the ADSC for C-27 training would be lowered from  three
years to one year by HQ AFPC because the C-27 would  be  terminated
from the Air Force inventory in January 1999; that  this  reduction
was designed to make the commitment commensurate with the existence
of the C-27 program; that  he  volunteered  and  was  accepted  for
assignment  to  fly  C-27s  at  Howard  AB,  Panama,   under   that
understanding; and that he subsequently signed paperwork reflecting
the one-year ADSC.

Applicant’s complete statement and documentary  evidence  submitted
in support of his  application  are  included  as  Exhibit  A  with
Attachments 1 and 2.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant completed C-27 Initial Qualification  Training  (IQT)  on
3 May 1998.  Therefore, he incurred a three-year ADSC of 2 May 2001
in accordance with AFI 36-2107, Table 1.5, Rule  8,  dated  6  July
1994.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPRS  recommends  that  the  application  be  denied.   It
states, in part,  that  in  support  of  his  case,  the  applicant
provides  several  pieces  of  evidence.   First,   the   applicant
references  several  phone  conversations   with   HQ   AFPC/DPAOM.
According to the applicant, he was to receive a one-year  ADSC  for
accepting the assignment to fly C-27s at Howard AFB.  According  to
the phone conversations, HQ AFPC, in conjunction with HQ  AMC,  was
considering lowering the ADSC for the C-27 to  one  year.   Despite
these conversations, the proposal was never approved.  According to
HQ AFPC/DPAOM, the ADSC for the  C-27  is  still  three  years.   A
conversation with assignment officers about a proposed reduction in
an ADSC is not Air Force policy and cannot be construed as such.

Additionally, the applicant  provides  a  copy  of  his  assignment
notification RIP in which he states he was instructed to  fill  out
the  ADSC  himself  by  the  Military   Personnel   Flight   (MPF).
Unfortunately, the MPF failed in its job to properly  document  the
proper ADSC for C-27 IQT by having the  applicant  personally  fill
out his own assignment notification RIP.

Based upon his own admission,  the  applicant  knew  the  ADSC  was
supposed to be three years for C-27 IQT and he erroneously  assumed
the policy was changing  to  a  one-year  ADSC.   However,  several
documents clearly show his assignment  officer  was  aware  of  the
three-year ADSC for C-27 IQT.  First, the trailer  remarks  on  the
assignment worksheet  clearly  show  a  three-year  ADSC  would  be
incurred IAW AFI 36-2107,  Table  l.5,  Rule  8  (Atch  2).   These
trailer  remarks  were  then  clearly  printed  on  the  assignment
notification message sent to the applicant’s  MPF  at  Ramstein  AB
(Atch 3).

In accordance with these two documents, the MPF at Ramstein  should
have prepared an AF Form 63 awarding  the  applicant  a  three-year
ADSC.  Unfortunately, this failed to  happen.   Despite  this,  the
applicant tacitly accepted the ADSC when he accepted the assignment
and training associated with it.  The applicant volunteered for and
accepted the assignment.  He did not elect to separate in  lieu  of
accepting the assignment and he has not indicated  in  his  appeal,
had he been counseled on the ADSC, he would have  separated  rather
than accept it.   A  complete  copy  of  the  advisory  opinion  is
included as Exhibit C with Attachments 1 through 4.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states, in part, that under  “Discussion”,  paragraph  a,
AFPC indicated they knew the proposal to lower the ADSC to one year
was disapproved, yet they didn’t notify him about the  disapproval.
He accepted his assignment and his orders were “cut” on the premise
of a one-year  ADSC.   Had  AFPC  informed  him  the  proposal  was
disapproved, he could have reconsidered his options.

Under “Discussion”, paragraph c, AFPC indicates he  knew  the  ADSC
would be three years.   Yes,  he  was  aware  Table  l.5,  Rule  8,
indicated  three  years  for  ADSC  but  he  also  believed,  after
conversations with AFPC, that he, and his fellow  pilots  who  were
accepting the remote  assignment  to  Panama,  were  all  going  to
receive a one-year ADSC as a concession to fill  the  short  notice
assignment.  Furthermore, he was not aware he would incur a  three-
year ADSC because this is the first  time  he  has  seen  the  AFPC
attachments 3 & 4 (Assignment  Worksheet,  Assignment  Notification
Message)  which  indicate  the  three-year  ADSC.   He  was   never
presented these documents nor was he  informed  of  their  contents
before now.

Under “Recommendation”, paragraph a, contrary to  AFPC  remarks  he
had indicated to the Howard AF MPF that, had  he  known  about  the
three-year ADSC before he left Ramstein AB, he could  have  made  a
better  informed  decision  and  worked  a  different   assignment.
Unfortunately, as he  indicated  in  his  original  Memorandum  for
Record, he was not made aware of the three-year ADSC until  he  was
halfway through training at Howard AB, Panama.  By  this  time,  it
was too late to work a different assignment as  all  his  household
goods had been moved to Panama and he was entering the  last  phase
of training.

Lastly, applicant states that under “Recommendation”, paragraph  6,
his new ADSC for his return assignment  to  Ramstein  AB  will  not
extend him past his 2 May 01 ADSC for the C-27.  On  the  contrary,
it is the C-27 ADSC which is extending his commitment past his  PCS
commitment to Ramstein AB (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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate
the existence of  a  probable  error  or  an  injustice  warranting
favorable action on the applicant’s request.  In  this  regard,  we
note that the applicant contends that he was told the ADSC for C-27
training would be lowered from three years to one year by  HQ  AFPC
because the C-27 would be terminated from the Air  Force  inventory
in January 1999; that this  reduction  was  designed  to  make  the
commitment commensurate with the existence  of  the  C-27  program;
that he volunteered and was accepted for assignment to fly C-27s at
Howard  AB,  Panama,  under  that  understanding;   and   that   he
subsequently signed paperwork reflecting the  one-year  ADSC.   The
Air Force recommends that the application be denied notwithstanding
the absence of an AF  Form  63  (ADSC  Counseling  Statement).   It
points out that the C-27 ADSC is still  three  years;  and  that  a
conversation with assignment officers about a proposed reduction in
an ADSC is not Air Force policy and cannot be  construed  as  such.
Based upon his own admission,  the  applicant  knew  the  ADSC  was
supposed to be three years for C-27 IQT and he erroneously  assumed
the policy was changing to a one-year ADSC.  Further, in accordance
with assignment instructions,  the  MPF  at  Ramstein  should  have
prepared an AF Form 63 awarding the applicant  a  three-year  ADSC.
Unfortunately, this failed to happen.  Despite this, the  applicant
tacitly accepted the ADSC  when  he  accepted  the  assignment  and
training associated with it.  We do not  agree.   In  view  of  the
Notification of Selection for Reassignment  document  reflecting  a
one-year ADSC for the C-17 IQT and the absence of  any  documentary
evidence indicating that the applicant was timely apprised  of  the
true ADSC and given  the  opportunity  to  voluntarily  accept  the
commitment as contemplated by Air Force policy, the benefit of  any
doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant.  Therefore,  we
believe that the applicant’s records should be  corrected  to  show
that he received a one-year ADSC for the C-27 IQT.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he incurred a  one-
year Active Duty Service Commitment  (ADSC)  as  a  result  of  his
completion of C-27 Initial Qualification Training (IQT).

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this  application  in
Executive Session on 13 April 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. Benedict A. Kausal IV, Panel Chair
      Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member
      Mr. Henry Romo Jr., Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Oct 98, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRS, dated 14 Jan 99, w/atchs.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 1 Feb 99.
     Exhibit E.  Electronic Mail from Applicant, dated 22 Feb 99.




                                   BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV
                                   Panel Chair





AFBCMR 98-03003




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:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to [applicant], be corrected to show that he incurred a
one year Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) as a result of his
completion of C-27 Initial Qualification Training (IQT).







    JOE G. LINEBERGER

    Director

    Air Force Review Boards Agency