RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00214
            INDEX CODE:  112.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank (DOR) be corrected to 12 July 1995.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His recruiter informed him that he would retain his time in grade  (TIG)  he
earned from a former Regular Air Force (RegAF) enlistment.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a  personal  statement,  10
character references and other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 January 1989, applicant enlisted in  the  Regular  Air  Force  in  the
grade of airman basic, for a period of six (6) years and  was  progressively
promoted to senior airman with an effective date and  date  of  rank  of  10
January 1992.

On 31 January 1996, applicant  was  honorably  separated  in  the  grade  of
senior airman under the provisions  of  AFI  36-3208  (Miscellaneous/General
Reasons).  The applicant had 4 years and 21 days time-in-grade  (TIG)  as  a
senior airman (E-4).  He served a total of 7 years and 21 days total  active
duty.

On 2 August 1999, 3 years, 6 months, and 1 day after being  discharged,  the
applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of  senior  airman,
for a period of four years.  He was given an adjusted DOR of 26  July  1998.
This date is equal to one-fourth of his original TIG as a senior airman  and
was computed in accordance with AFI 36-2605 which states “For prior  service
RegAF airman…compute the DOR on the  basis  of…one-fourth  of  the  member’s
previous TIG when the enlistment date is on or after the second  anniversary
and before the fourth anniversary of the adjusted DOS.”

At the time of his enlistment, the applicant  initialed  and  signed  an  AF
Form 3006, Enlistment Agreement - Prior Service/Active USAFR/ANG.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Special Programs and  AFBCMR  Manager,  Directorate,  Personnel  Program
Management, HQ AF/DPPAE, reviewed this  application  and  states  that  they
recommend the applicant’s request  be  denied.   His  DOR  was  adjusted  as
stated in his enlistment  contract  and  computed  in  accordance  with  the
governing directive.  However,  should  the  Board  consider  administrative
relief, they propose returning half of the applicant’s TIG  by  establishing
a 1 November 1997 DOR.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and  states  that  he  understood  the
date of rank adjustment to reflect the same day as his total active  federal
military service date.  He was not aware that the date  of  rank  adjustment
he was counseled on was considered a “promise” made to him by  a  recruiter.
It was his understanding  that  it  was  simply  an  adjustment  that  would
normally be made for anyone in his  position.   On  the  AF  Form  3006,  it
states, “If his last Regular component service  was  the  RegAF  and  he  is
enlisting for directed  duty  assignment  in  the  same  pay  grade  he  was
separated from the RegAF, within 4 years of his  date  of  separation  (DOS)
from the RegAF, he may be eligible for a DOR  adjustment  as  prescribed  by
appropriate directives.”  There is no specific date that he initialed by  on
the AF Form 3006.  There is no other mention of date of rank adjustments  on
the AF Form 3006 aside from the paragraph he quoted above.  He  reemphasizes
that he was given the impression that a routine adjustment was  to  be  made
to his DOR without mention to a “promise” from a recruiter.   He  originally
requested for an adjusted DOR of 12 July 1995, however,  he  is  willing  to
accept the 1 November 1997 DOR that AFPC recommended should  the  Board  not
concur with his request.  This would enable him to file for  a  supplemental
scoring of his last promotion test and  would  give  him  the  three  points
needed to be promoted to the grade of staff sergeant.





The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is attached  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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice  warranting  partial   relief.
Applicant contends that he was miscounseled regarding the date  of  rank  he
would receive upon enlisting as  a  prior  service  member.   The  applicant
indicates that one of the enticing incentives his  recruiter  counseled  him
about was that his date of rank to senior airman would  be  adjusted  to  11
July 1995; however, after testing and not being selected  for  promotion  to
staff sergeant, he realized that his date of rank had not been  adjusted  as
his recruiter had advised.  Clearly the applicant’s contract indicates  that
he would be eligible  for  an  adjusted  date  of  rank,  but  there  is  no
corroborating documentation indicating the recruiter  advised  him  that  he
would receive an 11 July 1995 date of rank.  Without this corroboration,  we
are not persuaded to give the applicant the contested  date  of  rank  since
his current date of rank appears to have been adjusted  in  accordance  with
the governing instruction.  It appears that the applicant made a good  faith
effort to contact the recruiter via electronic mail to obtain  corroborating
information concerning this  matter  but  the  recruiter  simply  would  not
respond.  Notwithstanding the foregoing,  we  are  persuaded  that  promises
were made by the recruiter and the applicant  fully  expected  his  date  of
rank would be adjusted to 11 July 1995; therefore, we believe  a  compromise
is appropriate in this case.  We note that  the  Air  Force  indicates  that
returning one-half of the applicant’s date of rank could be  considered  and
the applicant concurs with this remedy.  Therefore, we  recommend  that  his
date of rank to senior airman be adjusted to  1  November  1997  and  he  be
provided supplemental promotion consideration  for  all  appropriate  cycles
commencing with cycle 00E5.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that his date of rank  to  the  grade  of
senior airman is 1 November 1997.

It  is  further  recommended  that  applicant   be   provided   supplemental
consideration  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  staff  sergeant  for  all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5.

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent  to  supplemental
consideration that are separate and  apart,  and  unrelated  to  the  issues
involved in  this  application,  that  would  have  rendered  the  applicant
ineligible for the  promotion,  such  information  will  be  documented  and
presented to the  board  for  a  final  determination  on  the  individual’s
qualification for the promotion.

If  supplemental  promotion  consideration  results  in  the  selection  for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the  records
shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade  on  the
date of rank established by  the  supplemental  promotion  and  that  he  is
entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits  of  such  grade  as  of  that
date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 30 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
            Ms. Martha Maust, Member
            Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member

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

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 January 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 12 March 2001.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 23 March 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated, 3 April 2001, w/atch.




                 CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                 Panel Chair



AFBCMR 01-00214





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, be corrected to show that his date of rank to the grade of
senior airman is 1 November 1997.

      It is further recommended that applicant be provided supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5.

      If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to
supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to
the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the
applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented
and presented to the board for a final determination on the individual’s
qualification for the promotion.

      If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the records
shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the
date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is
entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that
date.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency