RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02615
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His date of rank (DOR) to SSgt (E-5) be corrected from 10 Feb 00 to 16
Jun 96, his DOR when he served in the U.S. Navy.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On 7 Jan 02, the AFI 36-2604 was changed to let prior service members
retain all time in grade if separated for less than 4 years. This
change was not grandfathered to prior service members that returned to
active duty prior to the date of publication of the change. He lost ¾
of his time in grade and he was only separated for 2 years and 10
days. He believes this change is discriminatory because it puts prior
service members entering after the change in a clear advantage for
promotion testing.
In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a copy of his DD
Form 214, Processing Orders, personal data sheet, and publication
change to AFI 36-2604, a personal statement, and letters from his
rating chain.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff
sergeant. Upon entry to active duty, Date of Rank was established in
accordance with AFI 36-2604, para 8.2 (Atch 1). Applicant’s adjusted
date of separation was more than 2 years but less than 4 years;
therefore, applicant received 25% of time in grade of E-5 and date of
rank was established as 10 Feb 00. Effective 18 Dec 01 AFI 36-2604,
para 8.2, was changed to read, “prior service enlisted returning to
active duty in the same grade, before the fourth anniversary of the
adjusted date of separation would receive 100% of time in grade. This
change replaced para 8 in its entirety. Changes are not grandfathered
and effective on date of publication.”
Applicant was enlisted in the U.S. Navy from 11 Jan 90 to 13 Aug 98
and was promotion to E-5 on 16 Jun 96. Applicant subsequently
enlisted in the Air Force on 25 Aug 00 and date of rank was
established as 10 Feb 00. Applicant returned to active duty with 2
years, 10 days adjusted date of separation in the grade of E-5.
Applicant received 25% time in grade of E-5 in accordance with AFI 36-
26-4, para 8.4, 1 Jul 99 (Atch 2) which awards members 25% of time in
grade if adjusted date of separation is more than 2 years but less
than 4 years.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAO stated that based on the governing directive, the
applicant’s date of rank was computed correctly; therefore they
recommend his request be denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 6 Dec 02 for review and comment. 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of
the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded that his DOR for SSgt and EAD should be changed from 10 Feb
01. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find
these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. The
applicant’s AF Form 3006, Enlistment Agreement, clearly indicates that
he understood that he had no claim to a higher grade and that 10 Feb
01 would be his rank as well as his date of enlistment. We therefore
agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the
rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant
has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error
or an injustice. In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the
relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of a 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 02-02615
in Executive Session on 29 January 2003, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Panel Chair
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
Ms. Martha Evans, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAO, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 02.
PHILIP SHEUERMAN
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02964
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-02964 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) to SSgt (E-5) be corrected from 6 Feb 01 to 1 Jan 96, his DOR when he served in the U.S. Army. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, the Board majority believes that it is not unreasonable to believe that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03805
The complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her response to the Air Force evaluation, applicant reiterates her request to change her DOR to her original active duty date of 1 Jul 00 or in the alternative consideration for her time served in the Air Force Reserve. _____________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02825
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-02825 INDEX CODE 129.01 131.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His time in grade (TIG) as an E5 be corrected to reflect all of his TIG from prior service in the US Navy and his date of rank (DOR) as an Air Force E5 be changed from 7 Mar 00 to 25 Jul 99. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03578
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03578 INDEX CODE: 131.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) be adjusted from 15 November 1996 to 15 November 1999. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to his release from active duty, Reduction-In Force, in...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00850
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-03593
His time in service dates were adjusted by the four months and five days of his break in service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPAO recommended denial indicating that the time frame from when the applicant was discharged to the time he returned to active duty was less than two years, which entitled him to 50 percent of his time in grade as a staff sergeant. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAO evaluation is at Exhibit...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-01257 INDEX CODE 131.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her time spent completing her degree on the Educational Delay Program (EDP) be recalculated to provide 100% credit so that her date of rank (DOR) to second lieutenant (2LT) would be 9 Jun 00, rather than 12 Feb 01. A complete copy of...
On 2 Nov 00, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an E-3, and was given a DOR equal to her date of enlistment (DOE). AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, is the governing directive for computing dates of ranks. 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 Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02315
DPPAOR states that in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, paragraph 8.4, the applicant’s date of rank was computed correctly. DPPPWB states that based on the applicant’s adjusted DOR, the first time he was eligible for promotion consideration to TSgt was cycle 03E6 (promotions effective August 2003 - July 2004). If the Board grants the applicant’s request to change his DOR to 19 September 1999, he would receive 28.5 weighted points for TIG and...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03157
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03157 INDEX CODE: APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) be recalculated to provide one hundred (100) percent credit for the months spent completing his degree on the Educational Delay Program (EDP). A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments,...