Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0202036
Original file (0202036.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02036
            INDEX CODE:  112.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His enlistment grade and date of rank (DOR) be corrected.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he enlisted in the Maryland  Air  National  Guard  (ANG)  in  1995  his
enlistment grade was E-5 with  a  DOR  of  2  May  95.   He  researched  the
applicable directives and determined that he should have enlisted as an  E-6
with a DOR of 1 Oct 88, then demoted to E-5 with a DOR of 2  May  95.   This
error is preventing him from being promoted to E-7 in a timely manner.

In support of his request,  applicant  provided  copies  of  his  enlistment
documents, his Army National Guard promotion order,  and  a  personnel  data
system printout.  His complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Documents provided by the applicant reflect that he is a prior service  Army
National Guardsman and that he enlisted in the Air National Guard on  2  May
95, in the grade of staff sergeant.  He has been  subsequently  promoted  to
the grade of technical sergeant, having assumed  that  grade  effective  and
with a date of rank of 1 Jul 00.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/DPFP reviewed applicant's request and recommends  denial.   DPFP  states
that when he enlisted  NGR  39-9,  Grade  Determination  for  Prior  Service
Enlistees, was the applicable regulation.  Table 2.8, Rule 2, clearly  shows
the maximum grade that can be held, which was E-5, because it was  prior  to
the sixth anniversary of his Date of Service.  As for  the  DOR  adjustment,
Table 2-9, Rule 4 states that for all other service, that DOR  is  the  date
of enlistment.  The DPFP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16  Aug
02 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest  of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  Evidence  has  not  been  presented  which
would lead us to believe that the regulations in effect  at  the  time  were
not appropriately applied or that he was treated differently than others  in
similar situations.  After reviewing the available  evidence  of  record  it
appears that his grade and  date  of  rank  upon  enlistment  into  the  Air
National Guard were properly determined.  Accordingly,  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.   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 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 Docket Number  216-82-5373  in
Executive Session on 2 Oct 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice, Panel Chair
      Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
      Mr. Carolyn B. Willis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ANG/DPFP, dated 31 Jul 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Aug 02.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03451

    Original file (BC-2002-03451.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03451 INDEX CODE: 102.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 14 months time in grade as an E-4 that he accrued in the Army be applied towards his date of rank (DOR) in the Air National Guard (ANG). He enlisted as an Airman First Class (A1C/E-3) with a date of rank of 2 February 2001 and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03654

    Original file (BC-2002-03654.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 National Guard (ANG) office of primary responsibility that ANG Instructions are clear on the establishment of DOR and subsequent requests for adjustments to such. The applicant had in excess of a two-year break in service from the Air Force before enlisting into the ANG establishing his DOR to be the date of his enlistment into the ANG. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02395

    Original file (BC-2002-02395.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, reflects that he received a general discharge on 31 May 2000 under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, para 3.21.3.2 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPFP recommends denial. 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 National Guard...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02395

    Original file (BC-2002-02395.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, reflects that he received a general discharge on 31 May 2000 under the provisions of AFI 36-3209, para 3.21.3.2 (Misconduct - Drug Abuse). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ANG/DPFP recommends denial. 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 National Guard...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02520

    Original file (BC-2002-02520.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    The DPFP 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 6 December 2002 for review and response (Exhibit D). Based on the evidence, it appears that no error occurred at the time the applicant transferred from the Army National Guard to the Air National Guard on 23 September 2000. Exhibit C. Letter, ANG/DPFP, dated 12 November 2002.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-02693

    Original file (BC-2001-02693.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPFP stated that, after being diagnosed with a seizure disorder, the applicant was discharged from the New Mexico Air National Guard on 1 Feb 01. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the AFBCMR Medical Consultant provided the following advisory opinion. The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200676

    Original file (0200676.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Unfortunately, the other unit within the state held a promotion board and used the allocation during the same time of his promotion board. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that the control grade roster provided by DPFP is from April 2001 and does not reflect the information that it should. This would reflect an error on the part of the monthly control grade report.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02610

    Original file (BC-2002-02610.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02610 INDEX CODE: 102.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her promotion date and date of rank (DOR) be changed from 4 June 2002 to 19 April 2002. In support of her appeal, the applicant provided a letter from the 175 MDS/SG, dated 26 June 2002 and Special Order A& - 272, dated 7 June 2002. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0100344

    Original file (0100344.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board directed that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect that he was not released from active duty on 8 Mar 96 under the provisions of AFI 36-3209 (Misconduct), transferred to the Kansas Air National Guard on 2 Apr 96, discharged from the Kansas Air National Guard on 31 Jul 97, and assigned to the Retired Reserve on 2 Aug 97; but was continued on active duty until 31 Jan 99; and, that he was released from active duty on 31 Jan 99 for the Convenience of the Government...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003028

    Original file (0003028.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03028 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) to SSgt (E-5) be corrected from 29 Feb 00 to 2 Nov 97, his DOR when he served in the Air National Guard (ANG); his extended active duty (EAD) date reflect 2 Mar 99 vice 29 Feb 00, and his Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) tests...