RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03261

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to entitle him  to  a  multiple  2.5,  rather  than
multiple 2, Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB).

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Military Personnel Flight  (MPF)  failed  to  counsel  him  regarding  a
pending SRB change.

While requesting a Career Job Reservation (CJR),  he  was  advised  that  he
would receive a multiple 2.5 SRB upon his reenlistment  and  that  it  would
expire on 9 September 2003, unless he received notification  of  a  decrease
in the bonus.  However, at the time of  his  reenlistment,  he  was  advised
that his multiple had  decreased.   Since  he  was  never  notified  of  the
decrease, he should receive the multiple of 2.5 that he was offered  at  the
time he agreed to reenlist.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits his personal  statement  and
reenlistment documents.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  attached  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant requested a CJR on 15 January 2003, and was told he  would  be
entitled to a multiple 2.5 SRB.

Effective 4 July 2003, the applicant’s SRB multiple was decreased to two.




He reenlisted in the Regular Air Force on 5 September 2003 for a  period  of
six years and received a Zone A, multiple 2, SRB.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
the Air Force made every effort to ensure members were aware of the  changes
to the SRB list.  There is no valid reason to change his  reenlistment  date
to allow him to receive an SRB.

The AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 17 October 2003 for review and response within 30 days.  However,  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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice.  The applicant contends that  he  requested
a CJR on 15 January 2003, and was told he would be entitled  to  a  multiple
2.5 SRB and that it would expire on 9 September  2003,  unless  he  received
notification of a decrease in the bonus.  He further contends  that  it  was
not until he began his reenlistment processing on 18 August  2003,  that  he
was advised that his multiple had decreased.  He contends that since he  was
never previously notified of the decrease, he should  receive  the  multiple
that he was promised at the time he requested a CJR and agreed to  reenlist.
 A majority of the Board has thoroughly reviewed the applicant’s  submission
and the evidence of record and is not persuaded that he has  been  a  victim
of an error or injustice.  In this respect, a majority of  the  Board  notes
that the Air Force was obligated to notify the  applicant  of  the  decrease
prior to his reenlistment.  As the applicant indicates, this was done on  18
August 2003, when  he  began  his  reenlistment  processing.   While  it  is
unfortunate the applicant’s SRB multiple was  decreased,  absent  a  showing
that he has been treated differently that other members similarly  situated,
a majority of the Board finds that he has failed to meet his burden that  he
has suffered an error or injustice.  Therefore, in view of  the  above,  and
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, a majority of  the  Board  finds
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of  error  or  injustice
and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2003-03261
in Executive Session on 3 December 2003, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Michelle Grace, Member
                       Mr. Christopher Carey, Member

By majority vote, the Board recommended  denial  of  the  application.   Mr.
Carey voted to correct the records  and  has  submitted  a  minority  report
which is attached at Exhibit E.   The  following  documentary  evidence  was
considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Sep 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 8 Oct 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Oct 03.
    Exhibit E.  Minority Report.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
                     CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  APPLICANT, DOCKET NO: BC-2003-03261

      The majority of the Board recommends denial of the applicant’s
request that his records be corrected to entitle him to a Selective
Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) multiple of 2.5, rather than 2.  I disagree.

      At the time the applicant made the informed decision to reenlistment,
he was advised that if he did so, he would be entitled to a 2.5 multiple.
It was not until weeks prior to his reenlistment that he was advised that
his multiple had been decreased to 2.  The majority of the panel finds that
since the Air Force met its obligation of notifying the applicant of the
decrease in his SRB multiple, albeit weeks prior to his reenlistment, he
has not suffered from either an error or an injustice.  I believe the Air
Force was also obligated to notify the applicant of the multiple decrease
prior to its effective date so that he had ample time to make an informed
decision to reenlist or not, and if he chose to do so, could take all
necessary action to insure he did so prior to his SRB multiple being
decreased.  However, in not notifying him of the decrease until after its
effective date, he was denied this opportunity.  Clearly, the Air Force
Personnel Center (AFPC) released the new SRB list in June 2003 so that
members affected by the change were notified in sufficient time to
reenlist, if eligible, prior to the multiple decrease.  In the applicant’s
case, since he would have been within 90-days of his date of separation
(DOS), he could have taken action to reenlist prior to the multiple
decrease taking effect on 4 July 2003, had he been notified in June 2003 of
the multiple decrease.  Furthermore, I find it unreasonable to conclude
that he was aware of the multiple decrease prior to its effective date and
took no action to ensure he did not lose his entitlement to the multiple
2.5 SRB.  For the applicant to prove that he was not notified of the
multiple decrease is, in essence, asking him to prove a negative.

      In view of the above, I find that the applicant has satisfied his
burden to show there has been an error or injustice and recommend his
records be corrected to entitle him to a multiple 2.5, rather than 2, SRB.




                                        CHRISTOPHER CAREY
                                        Member
MEMORANDUM FOR   THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
                 CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  APPLICANT, Docket No:  BC-2003-03261

      I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case and do
not agree with the majority members of the panel that the applicant’s
request should be denied.

      The applicant requested a Career Job Reservation (CJR) on 15 January
2003, and was advised that he would be eligible for a Zone A, Multiple 2.5,
Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) upon his reenlistment.  Headquarters,
United States Air Force (Hq USAF) released a new SRB list on 4 June 2003,
with all bonus deletions and decreases effective 4 July 2003, and
instructed Military Personnel Flights (MPFs) that affected personnel be
briefed on the change.

      The majority of the panel finds, in essence, that since the Air Force
fulfilled its obligation to notify the applicant of the bonus decrease
prior to his 5 September 2003 reenlistment, he has not suffered from an
error or an injustice.

      I note, however, the applicant was notified of the bonus decrease
when he began his reenlistment processing on 18 August 2003, well after the
effective date of the bonus decrease.  As such, I believe he was denied an
opportunity to take the necessary action to insure he reenlisted prior to
the bonus decrease.  Had he been advised of the change prior to its
effective date, he could have reenlisted prior to the change and received
the higher bonus.  Clearly the intent of releasing the new SRB list 30-days
prior to all deletions and decreases taking effect and instructing MPFs to
brief all affected personnel of the change, was to provide affected
personnel an opportunity to take the necessary action to ensure they
retained their eligibility for the higher bonus.  Furthermore, as noted by
the minority member, the Air Force failed to follow its own specified
notification procedures.  I have, therefore, decided that relief is
warranted and that his records should be corrected to show that he
reenlisted on 3 July 2003, with entitlement to a Zone A, Multiple 2.5,
Selective Reenlistment Bonus.







                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency
AFBCMR BC-2003-03261




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 he was honorably
discharged on 2 July 2003, rather than 4 September 2003, and reenlisted in
the Regular Air Force on 3 July 2003, rather than 5 September 2003, for a
period of six (6) years, with entitlement to a Zone A, Multiple two and a
half (2.5), Selective Reenlistment Bonus.






                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency
AFBCMR
1535 Command Dr, EE Wing, 3rd Flr
Andrews AFB, MD 20762-7002


Dear APPLICANT

      Your application to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military
Records, AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-03261, has been finalized.

      By a majority vote, the Board recommended that your application be
denied as set forth in the attached Record of Proceedings.  However, after
a careful review and consideration of all factors involved, the Director,
Air Force Review Boards Agency accepted the minority opinion and determined
the military records should be corrected as set forth in the attached copy
of a Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, United States Air Force.  The
office responsible for making the correction(s) will inform you when your
records have been changed.

      After correction, the records will be reviewed to determine if you
are entitled to any monetary benefits as a result of the correction of
records.  This determination is made by the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS-DE), Denver, Colorado, and involves the assembly and careful
checking of finance records.  It may also be necessary for the DFAS-DE to
communicate directly with you to obtain additional information to ensure
the proper settlement of your claim.   Because of the number and complexity
of claims workload, you should expect some delay.  We assure you, however,
that every effort will be made to conclude this matter at the earliest
practical date.

                                        Sincerely




                 ROSE M. KIRKPATRICK
                 Chief Examiner
                 Air Force Board for Correction
                 of Military Records


Attachments:
1.  Cy of Directive, w/Cy of Proceedings
2.  SAF/MRB Letter

cc:  DFAS-DE