Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02370
Original file (BC-2002-02370.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02370
            INDEX CODE:  131.05
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to retain the grade of technical sergeant  (E-6),  or  in  the
alternative, his date of rank (DOR) to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5)  be
changed to reflect 15 Apr 98, rather than 18 Aug 00.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon his enlistment in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) his recruiter  did  not
include one year of Air  Reserve  Command  (ARC)  duty  in  the  computation
because at the time he was serving in ARC.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD  Form  256AF,
Honorable Discharge certificate; copies of his DD Forms 214, Certificate  of
Release of Discharge from Active Duty; a copy of his active duty order,  and
excerpts from AFI 36-2002 and AFI 36-2001.  His  complete  submission,  with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in Navy Reserves on 31 Oct 83 and was  discharged  on  31
Jul 84.  He enlisted in the Regular Navy on 1 Aug 84 and was  discharged  on
4 Feb 94 in the grade of E-6.  He enlisted in the Navy Reserves on 2 Jun  94
and was discharged on 1 Jun 99.  He enlisted in the Air  Force  Reserves  on
19 Aug 99 and was discharged on 17 Aug 00 in the grade of E-5.   On  18  Aug
00, he enlisted in the RegAF in the grade of E-5 with a  date  of  rank  and
effective date of 18 Aug 00.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAEQ reviewed applicant's  request  and  recommends  denial.   DPPAEQ
states that AFI  36-2604,  Service  Dates  and  Dates  of  Rank,  authorizes
adjustments for time served in a Regular service component.   The  applicant
previously served with the Navy as an E-6.  He subsequently joined  the  Air
Force Reserves and on 18 Aug 00 he enlisted in the RegAF.  Because he had  a
break in active  component  service  greater  than  4  years,  his  DOR  was
established to equal his 18 Aug 00 date of enlistment as outlined in AFI 36-
2604.  Upon his enlistment he signed and initialed his Enlistment  Agreement
stating that  he  understood  and  accepted  the  terms  of  his  enlistment
agreement.  His DOR was computed in a consistent and fair  manner  according
to his enlistment contract and the governing directives.

The DPPAEQ evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that AFI 36-2604 states that if a member was serving  in  a
regular component other than the Regular Air Force and enlists  in  a  lower
grade due to Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS), the DOR will  be
computed from the original DOR for the enlistment grade and years  separated
from the Date of Separation (DOS).  The AFI makes  time-in-grade  and  TAFMS
provisions for direct accession of ARC service but makes no  provisions  for
the Naval Reserve service that he served after active duty.  There  is  only
a 6-month gap in service from  August  1984  to  present.   He  believes  he
should have been allowed to retain the rank of E-6 or at least retained  TIG
for the reduced pay grade of E-5.

In further support of his request, applicant provided  copies  of  documents
previously submitted and his Record of Discharge  from  the  Naval  Reserve.
His complete response, with attachments, is 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.  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  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  Force  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  02-02370  in
Executive Session on 18 Dec 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
      Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAEQ, dated 1 Oct 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Oct 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atch.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00850

    Original file (BC-2003-00850.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of E-3, with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 19 Apr 01. Air Force Instruction 36-2604, Service Dates and Date of Rank, stipulates that “Airmen in the following categories receive a DOR equal to the date of enlistment in the RegAF: Non-prior service enlistees (members who have served less than 24 months total active federal military service) or...

  • 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01305

    Original file (BC-2004-01305.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01305 INDEX CODE: 131.05 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank of technical sergeant be reinstated with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 March 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36-2604, Section 8. AFI 36-2002, Regular Air Force (RegAF) and Special Category Accessions, governing...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02761

    Original file (BC-2006-02761.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPAES states that according to AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank (DOR), section B, paragraph 8.1, “Airmen in the following categories receive a DOR equal to their date of enlistment in the RegAF: Non-prior service enlistees (members who have less than 24 months total active federal service).” Furthermore, section B, paragraph 8.2 states, “if enlistment grade was not held in a regular component, DOR will be equal to the date of enlistment.” Denial recommendation is based on the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201437

    Original file (0201437.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 15 May 96 for a period of 4 years. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00224

    Original file (BC-2004-00224.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00224 INDEX NUMBER: 131.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to retain the date of rank (DOR), 1 May 94, of his promotion to staff sergeant (SSgt) while in the Air Force Reserve. On 17 Aug 93, the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01683

    Original file (BC-2003-01683.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFI 36-2604 states, “Former AFROTC cadets ordered to EAD under Title 10, USC., 2105 and 2107, keep the date of rank specified on their reserve enlistment contract.” It implies that former AFROTC cadets did not have a previous DOR. Eighteen or nineteen year old cadet disenrolled from AFROTC have to give back time or money to the Air Force and have to be involuntarily recalled to active duty. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00703

    Original file (BC-2003-00703.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 21 Oct 02, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years and entered active duty in the grade of SSgt with a DOR of 21 Oct 02. He initialed and signed an AF Form 3006, Enlistment Agreement-Prior Service, stating he was enlisting in the grade of SSgt, that he had no claim to a higher grade, that entitlement to further promotions would be in accordance with regulations in effect at the time, and that provisions do not exist to accelerate promotion due to prior...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01824

    Original file (BC-2003-01824.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He is authorized the enlistment grade of E-7 based on active duty time served with Air National Guard and finishing his Community College of the Air Force (CCAF) degree and other Non-Commissioned Officer requirements. I understand my entitlement to further promotions will be in accordance with regulations in effect at the time of my eligibility for promotion and provisions do not exist to accelerate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01976

    Original file (BC-2002-01976.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He enlisted into the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 3 October 2000 in the grade of an E-5. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAE states the applicant, at the time of his reenlistment, had 8 years and 28 days of TAFMS. The enlistment agreement further stated the applicant’s DOR would be the date of his enlistment in the RegAF.