RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01199
            INDEX CODE: 128.05
            COUNSEL:  None
            HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 Oct 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given a Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) in  conjunction  with
his 13 Oct 04 reenlistment.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

There is an error in Section D on AF IMT 901, Reenlistment Eligibility
Annex to DD Form 4.  The bonus was initially put there  but  was  then
“whited out.”  The Robins AFB reenlistments  office  put  this  appeal
together and researched the issue.  They confirmed that, according  to
AFI 36-2101,  he  should  receive  the  SRB.   His  Career  Air  Force
Specialty Code (CAFSC) was on the SRB listing.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

In accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment in the USAF, the SRB is a
monetary incentive paid to enlisted members to  attract  reenlistments
in, and retraining into, critical military  skills  with  insufficient
reenlistments to  sustain  the  career  force  in  those  skills.   HQ
USAF/DPRS adds and deletes skills from the SRB  list  as  requirements
change.   There  are  three  SRB   eligibility   zones:   Zone A   for
reenlistments between 21 months and 6 years of  service;  Zone  B  for
reenlistments between 6 and 10 years, and  Zone  C  for  reenlistments
between 10 and  14  years.   The  SRB  multiple  level  indicates  the
severity of the reenlistment problem and the level of  pay  authorized
to deal with the problem.  Paragraph 2.3.1. indicates  airmen  do  not
qualify for the SRB if they reenlist or extend  their  enlistment  for
any purpose other than continued active  service  in  the  SRB  skill.
Additionally, according to paragraph 2.10.2.2., airmen retraining from
one SRB skill to another are eligible for the SRB at the multiple  for
the current skill or the  retraining-in  skill,  whichever  is  lower.
Paragraph 2.10.2.3. states airmen are not eligible for the SRB if they
are retraining from a non-SRB skill to an SRB skill  or  from  an  SRB
skill to a non-SRB skill.  AFI  36-2626,  Airman  Retraining  Program,
Attachment 8, SRB Provisions for Retraining, requires the enlistee  to
acknowledge understanding that if he retrains from a non-SRB skill  to
an SRB skill or  vice-versa,  he  would  not  receive  an  SRB  if  he
reenlists to obtain the retraining retainability, and  if  he  remains
eligible to reenlist, he is entitled to  the  SRB  multiple  level  in
effect when final approval is received.

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period  of  four
years on 16 Jan 01, giving him a date of separation  (DOS)  of  15 Jan
05.  On 28 Aug 03, he extended his enlistment for 12 months to qualify
for a permanent change of station (PCS) assignment.  This gave  him  a
new DOS of 15 Jan 06.

According to HQ AFPC/DPPAE (Exhibit C), on 1 Jun 04, the applicant was
approved for retraining from CAFSC 2A753 to CAFSC  3C0X1.   On  10 Jun
04, he extended his 16 Jan 01 enlistment for the  second  time  for  a
period of three months to qualify for retraining.  This gave him a new
DOS of 15 Apr 06.

On  12 Oct  04,  the  applicant  signed  AF  IMT   901,   Reenlistment
Eligibility Annex to DD Form 4 [Enlistment/Reenlistment Document], for
approved retraining in CAFSC 3C0X1 (see Exhibit  A).   In  Section  D,
Certification by  Members  Authorized  Reenlistment  Bonus,  the  last
sentence reads, “I understand I will be paid a Zone  ___  Multiple ___
bonus based on ___ years and ___ months of  continued  service.”   The
blank  spaces  appear  to  have  something  covered  over   with   the
applicant’s initials and those of the military personnel flight  (MPF)
representative.

The applicant reenlisted on 13 Oct 04 for five years and  six  months,
giving him a new DOS of 12 Apr 2010.  He began retraining for his  new
CAFSC on 8 Nov 04, according to HQ AFPC/DPPAER’s 24 May 05 email,  and
had a projected class  graduation  date  of  14 Feb  05.   If  he  had
reenlisted in his old AFSC on 13 Oct 04, instead of for retraining, he
would have been eligible for a Zone A, multiple 3.5  bonus.   The  new
career field was not authorized an SRB.

According to the military personnel  data  system,  the  applicant  is
serving in the 3C031 career field as a mission software loader and has
been selected for promotion to staff sergeant, with a  projected  date
of rank of 1 Aug 05.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAE asserts the applicant was not authorized to receive  the
SRB because he was approved for retraining  out  of  the  skill.   The
applicant had been approved for retraining into the 3C0X1 career field
prior to reenlisting; therefore, he was eligible for the SRB in effect
for the new career field.  However, since the 3C0X1 career  field  was
not authorized an SRB, the applicant was not authorized  an  SRB  upon
his reenlistment.  By accepting retraining into the 3C  career  field,
he waived all rights to the SRB in his previous career field.   Denial
is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant resubmits the documents included with his DD  Form  149,
indicating this information was gathered by Robins AFB  reenlistments.
They [applicant’s emphasis] found the evidence he should receive  this
bonus; it states that in the regulation.

A complete copy of applicant’s response,  with  attachments  [same  as
Exhibit A], is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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  careful  review  of  the
evidence of record, the  applicant’s  submission,  and  the  governing
directives, we are not persuaded  he  is  entitled  to  an  SRB.   The
applicant claims the Robins AFB reenlistment office “put together  and
researched” his package proving he is entitled to his SRB.  He appears
to base his assertion on AFI 36-2101, the  instruction  pertaining  to
classification of military personnel.  However, we do not  find  these
uncorroborated  assertions,  in  and   by   themselves,   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air  Force.   The
reenlistment  instruction,  AFI  36-2606,  appears  to  override   the
applicant’s argument.  The instruction indicates airmen do not qualify
for an SRB if they reenlist or extend their enlistment for any purpose
other  than  continued  active  service  in  the  current  SRB  skill.
Further, airmen are not eligible for the SRB if  they  are  retraining
from an SRB skill to a non-SRB skill, as in his case, or  vice  versa.
The applicant was approved for retraining on 1 Jun 04, and  on  10 Jun
04,  extended  his  enlistment  for  three  months  to   qualify   for
retraining.  On 12 Oct 04, he signed and  initialed  an  AF  IMT  901,
which had been amended to reflect he was not entitled to a bonus.   He
reenlisted for five years and  six  months  on  13 Oct  04  and  began
retraining on 8 Nov 04.  The applicant was not eligible for the SRB in
his old career field, and his new career field was  not  authorized  a
bonus.  The applicant has not established  that  he  was  treated  any
differently from other members similarly situated.  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  not
sustained 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 14 July 2005 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
                 Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-01199 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Apr 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAE, dated 14 Apr 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Apr 05.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.





                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair