RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01841
            INDEX CODE:  112.02
XXXXXXX     COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 DECEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  Her rank be  changed  from  airman  first  class  (A1C)  to  staff
sergeant (SSgt).

2.  Her date of rank (DOR) be adjusted to reflect her previous  active
duty Reserve service.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was not allowed the opportunity to pursue a waiver which may  have
entitled her to retain some or all of her previous rank.  In addition,
she believes the record is unjust because she has not been  granted  a
date of rank adjustment to reflect her previous active duty service.

In support of her request, the applicant provided a personal letter; a
letter from her current  commander  supporting  her  request;  several
character letters; AF Form 910(s),  Enlisted  Performance  Report;  AF
Form 214(s), Certificate of Release or  Discharge  from  Active  Duty;
Email correspondence; Point Credit Summary and excerpts from  AFI  36-
2002, Regular Air Force and Special Category Accessions.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the personnel data system  and  her  DD  Form  214
reflects the applicant served in the Air Force Reserves  from  3 April
1993 to 6 June 2006 and was progressively promoted  to  the  grade  of
Technical Sergeant (E-6).  On 7 Jun 2006, she enlisted on active  duty
in the grade of A1C (E-3). She is currently assigned as  an  Aerospace
Propulsion Journeyman in the 552d Maintenance  Group  at  Tinker  AFB,
Oklahoma.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPAE recommends denial.  DPPAE states the applicant  did  not
hold A1C in a regular service component.  In accordance with  AFI  36-
2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, Chapter 8.2 (Atch 1),  "If  the
enlistment grade was not held in a  Regular  component,  DOR  will  be
equal to the date of enlistment".  Therefore, the applicant's DOR  has
been determined to be 7 June 2006, her date  of  enlistment  into  the
USAF.  After reviewing her records and the  documents  she  submitted,
there were no errors or injustices noted.  The applicant does not meet
the criteria for a DOR adjustment in accordance with AFI 36-2604.

The complete DPPAE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAOR recommends denial.  DPPAOR states her record shows  she
was given credit toward  her  TAFMSD  with  her  basic  and  technical
training.

The complete DPPAOR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant responded stating that because  of  misinformation  from
her recruiter, she was not able to apply for a waiver or exception  to
policy  concerning  Total  Active  Federal  Military  Service  "TAFMS"
requirements to her rank or be given a DOR adjustment.  She  requested
the DOR adjustment in  conjunction  with  a  rank/grade  determination
based on the AFI being unjust.    She  states  she  was  not  able  to
compete for Senior Airman Below the Zone with her  peers  because  she
did not meet the time in service or DOR requirements.  She believes if
she had been allowed to apply for a  waiver,  this  would  not  be  an
issue. In  addition,  she  did  not  request  a  TAFMS  adjustment  or
correction. She is asking the Board to  determine  that  there  was  a
waiver or exception to policy provision in AFI 36-2002 concerning  the
24 TAFMS requirement to allow her to retain some or all of her  former
rank.  She is requesting a rank/grade correction from A1C to SSgt  and
a DOR correction from 7 June 2006 to 27 February 2005.

The complete response, with attachments, is a 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 a thorough review  of  the
applicant’s submission, we are  not  persuaded  the  relief  requested
should be granted.  We took  notice  of  the  complete  submission  in
judging the merits of the case; however, it appears that her grade was
appropriately  determined   in   accordance   with   the   established
guidelines.  Therefore, we find no evidence of an error in  this  case
and are not persuaded by the evidence provided  that  any  extenuating
circumstances exists which would warrant adjustment of her grade as an
exception to policy.  Accordingly, we  agree  with  the  opinions  and
recommendations of the Air Force offices 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.   Absent
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis  upon
which to recommend granting the relief sought.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore,
the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate  the  existence  of  material  error  or  injustice;   the
application  was  denied  without  a  personal  appearance;  and   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-
2007-01841  in  Executive  Session  on  28  August  2007,  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:


                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member
                 Mr. Mark J.  Novitski, Member









The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-
01841 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 November 2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 22 June 2007.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAOR, dated 26 June 2007.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 July 2007.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 August 2007.




                                        JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                        Panel Chair