RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00214
		INDEX CODE:  112.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank (DOR) be corrected to 12 July 1995.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His recruiter informed him that he would retain his time in grade (TIG) he earned from a former Regular Air Force (RegAF) enlistment.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, 10 character references and other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 10 January 1989, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of airman basic, for a period of six (6) years and was progressively promoted to senior airman with an effective date and date of rank of 10 January 1992.

On 31 January 1996, applicant was honorably separated in the grade of senior airman under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Miscellaneous/General Reasons).  The applicant had 4 years and 21 days time-in-grade (TIG) as a senior airman (E-4).  He served a total of 7 years and 21 days total active duty.

On 2 August 1999, 3 years, 6 months, and 1 day after being discharged, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of senior airman, for a period of four years.  He was given an adjusted DOR of 26 July 1998.  This date is equal to one-fourth of his original TIG as a senior airman and was computed in accordance with AFI 36-2605 which states “For prior service RegAF airman…compute the DOR on the basis of…one-fourth of the member’s previous TIG when the enlistment date is on or after the second anniversary and before the fourth anniversary of the adjusted DOS.”

At the time of his enlistment, the applicant initialed and signed an AF Form 3006, Enlistment Agreement - Prior Service/Active USAFR/ANG.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Special Programs and AFBCMR Manager, Directorate, Personnel Program Management, HQ AF/DPPAE, reviewed this application and states that they recommend the applicant’s request be denied.  His DOR was adjusted as stated in his enlistment contract and computed in accordance with the governing directive.  However, should the Board consider administrative relief, they propose returning half of the applicant’s TIG by establishing a 1 November 1997 DOR.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states that he understood the date of rank adjustment to reflect the same day as his total active federal military service date.  He was not aware that the date of rank adjustment he was counseled on was considered a “promise” made to him by a recruiter.  It was his understanding that it was simply an adjustment that would normally be made for anyone in his position.  On the AF Form 3006, it states, “If his last Regular component service was the RegAF and he is enlisting for directed duty assignment in the same pay grade he was separated from the RegAF, within 4 years of his date of separation (DOS) from the RegAF, he may be eligible for a DOR adjustment as prescribed by appropriate directives.”  There is no specific date that he initialed by on the AF Form 3006.  There is no other mention of date of rank adjustments on the AF Form 3006 aside from the paragraph he quoted above.  He reemphasizes that he was given the impression that a routine adjustment was to be made to his DOR without mention to a “promise” from a recruiter.  He originally requested for an adjusted DOR of 12 July 1995, however, he is willing to accept the 1 November 1997 DOR that AFPC recommended should the Board not concur with his request.  This would enable him to file for a supplemental scoring of his last promotion test and would give him the three points needed to be promoted to the grade of staff sergeant.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is attached 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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice warranting partial relief.  Applicant contends that he was miscounseled regarding the date of rank he would receive upon enlisting as a prior service member.  The applicant indicates that one of the enticing incentives his recruiter counseled him about was that his date of rank to senior airman would be adjusted to 11 July 1995; however, after testing and not being selected for promotion to staff sergeant, he realized that his date of rank had not been adjusted as his recruiter had advised.  Clearly the applicant’s contract indicates that he would be eligible for an adjusted date of rank, but there is no corroborating documentation indicating the recruiter advised him that he would receive an 11 July 1995 date of rank.  Without this corroboration, we are not persuaded to give the applicant the contested date of rank since his current date of rank appears to have been adjusted in accordance with the governing instruction.  It appears that the applicant made a good faith effort to contact the recruiter via electronic mail to obtain corroborating information concerning this matter but the recruiter simply would not respond.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, we are persuaded that promises were made by the recruiter and the applicant fully expected his date of rank would be adjusted to 11 July 1995; therefore, we believe a compromise is appropriate in this case.  We note that the Air Force indicates that returning one-half of the applicant’s date of rank could be considered and the applicant concurs with this remedy.  Therefore, we recommend that his date of rank to senior airman be adjusted to 1 November 1997 and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration for all appropriate cycles commencing with cycle 00E5.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that his date of rank to the grade of senior airman is 1 November 1997.

It is further recommended that applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5.

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the board for a final determination on the individual’s qualification for the promotion.

If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 30 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		Panel Chair
		Member
		Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 January 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 12 March 2001.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 23 March 2001.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated, 3 April 2001, w/atch.

			
			Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-00214

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, be corrected to show that his date of rank to the grade of senior airman is 1 November 1997.

	It is further recommended that applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5.

	If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the board for a final determination on the individual’s qualification for the promotion.

	If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

		
		Director
		Air Force Review Boards Agency