Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00511
Original file (BC-2004-00511.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00511
            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) and that she receive a bonus for enlisting in  the  3C1X1
Air Force Specialty (AFS).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her recruiter provided her erroneous information  when  she  enlisted.
She enlisted as a Radio Communication Systems Helper  for  a  six-year
term.  As such, she contends she was  eligible  for  and  should  have
received an enlistment bonus for enlisting in a critical career field.
 She states that because she enlisted  for  a  six-year  term  on  her
initial enlistment, she was qualified to enter the Air National  Guard
(ANG) as an E-3.

In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided copies of her  DD
Form 4, Enlistment/Reenlistment Document, her enlistment order  and  a
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant, a member of  the  Virgin  Islands  Air  National  Guard
(VIANG), enlisted on 18 September 1998, for a period of six years,  as
a Radio Communications Systems Helper.  She is  currently  serving  in
the VIANG as a traditional guardsman in the grade of staff sergeant (E-
5).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/DPPI recommends denial.  DPPI notes the ANG  Enlisted  Cash  Bonus
Program provides enlistment and reenlistment  bonuses  to  traditional
guardsmen enlisting for six  years  in  specialties  deemed  critical.
Each state and territory publishes an annual  incentive-eligible  list
of critical AFSC’s.  She, the VIANG,  nor  the  NGB  can  provide  the
incentive-eligible list from September 1998 that would show whether or
not she was eligible for any incentives.  DPPI  notes  that  non-prior
service members enlisting into a critical AFS  for  a  period  of  six
years are authorized the enlistment grade of E-3.   In  fact,  her  DD
Form 4 does indeed show  she  enlisted  for  a  period  of  six  years
beginning in the pay grade of airman first class (A1C/E-3).   However,
an individual enlisting in the senior year  of  high  school  will  be
enlisted in the grade of E-1 until such  time  as  they  graduate  and
present required documents whereupon they are immediately promoted  to
the grade of E-3.   Numerous  attempts  were  made  to  determine  her
education level at the time of her enlistment and no documentation was
provided to verify her eligibility.  Therefore, her request to  change
her enlistment grade from E-1 to E-3 is not substantiated and  she  is
therefore not considered eligible for  E-3 at enlistment.

ANG/DPPI’s complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
29 October 2004 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 an error or injustice.  Applicant contends  that  she
was provided erroneous information when she  enlisted  in  the  VIANG.
However, she has not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate  her
allegation of miscounseling with respect to the bonus  opportunity  or
that she should have been enlisted in the grade of Airman First  Class
(E-3).  After reviewing the evidence of record, we note that  the  ANG
cannot determine whether applicant's AFSC  was  listed  as  incentive-
eligible at the  time  of  applicant's  enlistment.   Based  upon  the
presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental  affairs  and
without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that the  applicant's
grade at the time of her enlistment was correct.  Should the applicant
provide documentary evidence showing that her AFSC was entitled  to  a
bonus at the time of her enlistment, we would be willing to reconsider
her appeal.  In the absence of such evidence, favorable action on  her
application is not recommended.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-00511  in  Executive  Session  on  4  January  2005,  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Panel Chair
      Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
      Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ANG/DPPI, dated 2 Nov 04, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 04.




                                   PATRICIA D. VESTAL
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00507

    Original file (BC-2004-00507.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing the evidence of record, we note that the ANG cannot determine whether applicant's AFSC was listed as incentive- eligible at the time of applicant's enlistment. Should the applicant provide documentary evidence showing that her AFSC was entitled to a bonus at the time of her enlistment, we would be willing to reconsider her appeal. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00509

    Original file (BC-2004-00509.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After reviewing the evidence of record, we note that the ANG cannot determine whether applicant's AFSC was listed as incentive- eligible at the time of applicant's enlistment. Should the applicant provide documentary evidence showing that her AFSC was entitled to a bonus at the time of her enlistment, we would be willing to reconsider her appeal. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number...

  • 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03055

    Original file (BC-2003-03055.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03055 INDEX CODE: 128.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be awarded cash enlistment and reenlistment bonuses for both periods of her service in the Air National Guard (ANG): 1997 for three years and 2003 for six years. The criteria for receipt of enlistment/reenlistment bonuses in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02472

    Original file (BC-2003-02472.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02472 INDEX CODE: 128.06 COUNSEL: WALTER L. BOYAKI HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The bonus/loan agreements signed at the time of his appointment in the New York Air National Guard (NY ANG) on 11 March 2001 be honored; or in the alternative, he be allowed to be honorably discharged from the NY ANG. ...

  • 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-2003-04285

    Original file (BC-2003-04285.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant, an Active/Guard Reserve (AGR) member of the Arizona ANG (AZ ANG), was laterally transferred into a full-time GS-09 civilian position attached to a military position at the grade of SMSgt. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-00317

    Original file (BC-2004-00317.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPI’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reiterates his contention that he was not awarded service credit for his full-time experience on completion of his training. He addresses the DPPI contention that AFI 36-2005, Table 2.1, Note 8, states that applicants with less than 14 years service credit will be appointed in the grade of captain. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03006

    Original file (BC-2005-03006.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He did not appear to have fully grasped the material and had a difficult time during the PC. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and the circumstances of their separation. The applicant was unable to progress in technical training, first in the computer programming career field and then when he was reclassified in the telephone systems AFSC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04974

    Original file (BC 2013 04974.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04974 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be awarded an enlistment bonus for her Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC)/7-skill level and she be awarded the rank of airman first class. The applicant initialed and signed the DD Form 1966 continuation sheet that states both “Stripes for Unit Bonus Skills” and “Enlisting with Stripes for:” sections were...