Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03736
Original file (BC-2002-03736.doc) Auto-classification: Approved




                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03736
            INDEX CODE:  102.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her enlistment in the Air National Guard (ANG) be as an Airman (Amn/E-
2) instead of as an Airman Basic (AB/E-1).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She has over 30 quarter hours of college that entitles her  to  enlist
at the higher grade of Amn/E-2.

In support  of  her  appeal,  applicant  submits  a  letter  from  the
Recruiting Office Supervisor of the Ohio ANG (OH ANG)  and  copies  of
her DD Form 4/1 and DD Form  4/2,  Enlistment/Reenlistment  documents.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted her enlistment in the Ohio ANG on  17 October
2001 while she was a high school  senior.   She  graduated  from  high
school in June 2002 with 33-quarter hours of college credit.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ANG/DPPI recommends denial under the auspices of Air National Guard
Instruction (ANGI) 36-2002, Enlistment and  Reenlistment  in  the  Air
National Guard.  Table 1.7, rule 10, of ANGI  36-2002  indicates  that
enlistees may be enlisted at the grade of E-2 if they have at least 30
but less than 67 quarter-hours of college credit.   DPPI  states  that
since  the  applicant’s  enlistment  was  prior  to  her  high  school
graduation and therefore prior to her  accumulation  of  the  required
college credit, that her enlistment as an E-1 was correct.

ANG/DPPI’s evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
21 March 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date,
there has been no response 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an injustice warranting partial relief.  After  reviewing
the evidence of record, we believe that the applicant's enlistment  in
the Air National Guard in the grade of Airman Basic was in  accordance
with ANGI  36-2002.   Therefore  we  find  no  reason  to  change  her
enlistment grade.  However, in view of the  fact  that  the  applicant
accrued over 30 quarter hours of  college  credits  by  the  time  she
graduated from high school in June 2002,  we  believe  she  should  be
entitled to the benefit of this achievement.  In view of the above and
in an effort to remove any possibility of an injustice,  we  recommend
that she be promoted to the grade of Airman on 30 June  2002  and  her
records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that she  was  promoted  to
the grade of airman (E-2) effective and with a date of rank of 30 June
2002 in the Air National Guard and the Reserve of the Air Force.

______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-03736 in Executive Session on 20 May 2003, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
      Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
      Mr. Kenneth Dumm, Member

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Nov 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ ANG/DPPI, dated 6 Mar 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Mar 03.



                                   JOHN L. ROBUCK
                                   Panel Chair
                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC




[pic]
Office Of The Assistant Secretary

AFBCMR BC-2002-03736




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 she was
promoted to the grade of airman (E-2) effective and with a date of
rank of 30 June 2002 in the Air National Guard and the Reserve of the
Air Force.







     JOE G. LINEBERGER

     Director

     Air Force Review Boards Agency


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03794

    Original file (BC-2003-03794.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The above notwithstanding, the Air National Guard OPR has found that, based on the quarter hours she had earned at the time of her enlistment, she should have been enlisted as an Airman and not an Airman Basic. We agree with their finding and therefore recommend that the records be corrected as indicated below. MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office Of The Assistant Secretary AFBCMR BC-2003-03794 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04714

    Original file (BC-2012-04714.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of her enlistment, she had enough college credits to enlist in the grade of A1C. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PO recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00205

    Original file (BC-2003-00205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 12 January 1998 in the grade of SrA. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. 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 applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01234

    Original file (BC 2013 01234.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Grade Determination for Non-Prior Service (NPS) Enlistees, enlistment in the grade of E-3 is authorized when the applicant meets the following criteria: a. Presents General Billy Mitchell Award certificate showing successful completion of the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) training program. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary which is attached at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00997

    Original file (BC-2003-00997.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00997 INDEX CODE: 110.03 COUNSEL: ZIMMERMAN & LAVIN HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reinstated in the Texas Air National Guard (TXANG) Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) program, effective 15 April 2002, with all pay that was lost (less her subsequent earnings as a civil service technician) or in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00926

    Original file (BC-2004-00926.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was recommended for discharge for non-participation. In accordance with Air National Guard Instruction (ANGI) 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, “…members may be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period.” The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with prescribed directives and the State’s Staff Judge Advocate found the discharge legally...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03278

    Original file (BC-2003-03278.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ANGI 36-3001 also gives information about how to extend members every 30 to 60 days during this time period. In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement and copies of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, orders placing her on active duty, extending her active duty for 13 days, and placing her on active duty for a month to perform a line of duty (LOD) determination. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02407

    Original file (BC-2004-02407.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The few incidents his commander cites in his recommendation to demote do not support the demotion decision. The commander’s basis for demotion action is too vague and lacks the evidence necessary to prove the applicant actually made a false statement. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2004-02407 in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2004-02142

    Original file (bc-2004-02142.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was initially enlisted on 8 May 2003 in the higher grade of A1C as she enlisted in a critical Air Force Specialty (AFS). She was enlisted in the next lower grade and later found another airman who had enlisted under the same circumstances but at the higher grade. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00510

    Original file (BC-2004-00510.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00510 INDEX CODE: 112.03, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her enlistment grade be changed from E-1 (Airman Basic) to E-3 (Airman First Class); that she receive a bonus for enlisting in the 3C1X1 Air Force Specialty (AFS); and, that her promotion to E-4 be adjusted. After reviewing...