RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02370
		INDEX CODE:  131.05
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to retain the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), or in the alternative, his date of rank (DOR) to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) be changed to reflect 15 Apr 98, rather than 18 Aug 00.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon his enlistment in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) his recruiter did not include one year of Air Reserve Command (ARC) duty in the computation because at the time he was serving in ARC.  

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 256AF, Honorable Discharge certificate; copies of his DD Forms 214, Certificate of Release of Discharge from Active Duty; a copy of his active duty order, and excerpts from AFI 36-2002 and AFI 36-2001.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in Navy Reserves on 31 Oct 83 and was discharged on 31 Jul 84.  He enlisted in the Regular Navy on 1 Aug 84 and was discharged on 4 Feb 94 in the grade of E-6.  He enlisted in the Navy Reserves on 2 Jun 94 and was discharged on 1 Jun 99.  He enlisted in the Air Force Reserves on 19 Aug 99 and was discharged on 17 Aug 00 in the grade of E-5.  On 18 Aug 00, he enlisted in the RegAF in the grade of E-5 with a date of rank and effective date of 18 Aug 00.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAEQ reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.  DPPAEQ states that AFI 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, authorizes adjustments for time served in a Regular service component.  The applicant previously served with the Navy as an E-6.  He subsequently joined the Air Force Reserves and on 18 Aug 00 he enlisted in the RegAF.  Because he had a break in active component service greater than 4 years, his DOR was established to equal his 18 Aug 00 date of enlistment as outlined in AFI 36-2604.  Upon his enlistment he signed and initialed his Enlistment Agreement stating that he understood and accepted the terms of his enlistment agreement.  His DOR was computed in a consistent and fair manner according to his enlistment contract and the governing directives.

The DPPAEQ evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that AFI 36-2604 states that if a member was serving in a regular component other than the Regular Air Force and enlists in a lower grade due to Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS), the DOR will be computed from the original DOR for the enlistment grade and years separated from the Date of Separation (DOS).  The AFI makes time-in-grade and TAFMS provisions for direct accession of ARC service but makes no provisions for the Naval Reserve service that he served after active duty.  There is only a 6-month gap in service from August 1984 to present.  He believes he should have been allowed to retain the rank of E-6 or at least retained TIG for the reduced pay grade of E-5.

In further support of his request, applicant provided copies of documents previously submitted and his Record of Discharge from the Naval Reserve.  His complete response, with attachments, 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.  Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe that the regulations were not appropriately applied or that he was treated differently than others in similar situations.  After reviewing the available evidence of record it appears that his grade and date of rank upon enlistment into the Air Force were properly determined.  Accordingly, 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 applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number 02-02370 in Executive Session on 18 Dec 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAEQ, dated 1 Oct 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Oct 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated, w/atch.