RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2003-03027
INDEX CODE 131.05
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His date of rank (DOR) for E-4/senior airman be changed from 8 Nov 01
to 23 Jul 00.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He served in the Marine Corps from Oct 89 to Oct 93. He then served in
the Army National Guard from Nov 93 to Nov 01. He was promoted to E-4
in Jan 93 and held that rank until Mar 01 when he was promoted to E-5.
On 8 Nov 01, he joined the Air Force and was reduced to E-4. He
believes if the Air Force is going to recalculate his time-in-service
(TIS), they should at least give him credit for the first time he put
on E-4. He is being unjustly reduced one pay grade for coming on
active duty.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant joined the Marine Corps on 18 Oct 89. On 17 Oct 93,
after four years of active service, he was honorably released from
active duty in the grade of E-4 and transferred to the Army National
Guard. He achieved the rank of E-5 on 5 Jan 01 and was honorably
discharged from the Army National Guard in that rank on 7 Nov 01 after
eight years, one month and six days of service. He enlisted in the
Regular Air Force on 8 Nov 01 as an SRA with a DOR of 8 Nov 01.
AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, states that if a member
returns on active duty after four years, the DOR will be the date of
active duty entry.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPAOR indicates that, based on the governing directive, the
applicant’s DOR was computed correctly. Therefore, his request should
be denied.
A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, 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 5 Dec 03 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded that his DOR for E-4 should be changed. The applicant’s
contentions are duly noted; however, AFI 36-2604 requires his DOR be
his date of entry to active duty because of his more than four-year
break in active duty service. We therefore agree with the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as
the basis for our decision that the applicant did not sustain his
burden of having 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 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 this application in
Executive Session on 29 January 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Panel Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-03027 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Aug 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAOR, dated 24 Nov 03, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Dec 03.
CAROLYN J. WATKINS-TAYLOR
Panel Chair
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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-00604
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00604 INDEX NUMBER: 131.05 XXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) as a staff sergeant (SSgt) (E-5) in the Air Force be established as 1 Apr 96, the date he was promoted to E-5 during his previous service in the Marine Corps. He enlisted in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00224
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-2003-02352
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02352 INDEX CODE: 123.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The period of his service that was considered “lost time” be restored to his period of active service. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPWR evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/JA indicated that even though the evidence clearly supports...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01965
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 18 September 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard (ANG) at the age of 18 in the rank of airman basic (E-1) in the Air Force Specialty Code 43132E, Apprentice Strategic Aircraft Maintenance Specialist. On 9 November 2001, according to the Military Personnel Data System (MILPDS), the applicant enlisted in the Air...
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-2003-02910
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Prior to entering active duty she served in the Army National Guard for 18 years. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that the problem is not with computing her TAFMSD correctly; the problem is not having been provided with the correct information by the Air Force Recruiter. ...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02690
The Air Force Overseas Short/Long Tour Ribbons were established on 12 Oct 80, after the applicant’s 19 Nov 78 separation. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be awarded the AFOSTR. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03103
The DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 Feb 03 for review and comment within 30 days. After careful consideration of the applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we see no evidence of an error or injustice that would warrant a change in his RE code. ...