RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-02615

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank (DOR) to SSgt (E-5) be corrected from 10 Feb 00 to 16 Jun 96, his DOR when he served in the U.S. Navy.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 7 Jan 02, the AFI 36-2604 was changed to let prior service members retain all time in grade if separated for less than 4 years.  This change was not grandfathered to prior service members that returned to active duty prior to the date of publication of the change.  He lost ¾ of his time in grade and he was only separated for 2 years and 10 days.  He believes this change is discriminatory because it puts prior service members entering after the change in a clear advantage for promotion testing.

In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a copy of his DD Form 214, Processing Orders, personal data sheet, and publication change to AFI 36-2604, a personal statement, and letters from his rating chain.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff sergeant.  Upon entry to active duty, Date of Rank was established in accordance with AFI 36-2604, para 8.2 (Atch 1).  Applicant’s adjusted date of separation was more than 2 years but less than 4 years; therefore, applicant received 25% of time in grade of E-5 and date of rank was established as 10 Feb 00.  Effective 18 Dec 01 AFI 36-2604, para 8.2, was changed to read, “prior service enlisted returning to active duty in the same grade, before the fourth anniversary of the adjusted date of separation would receive 100% of time in grade.  This change replaced para 8 in its entirety.  Changes are not grandfathered and effective on date of publication.”

Applicant was enlisted in the U.S. Navy from    11 Jan 90 to 13 Aug 98 and was promotion to E-5 on 16 Jun 96.  Applicant subsequently enlisted in the Air Force on 25 Aug 00 and date of rank was established as 10 Feb 00.  Applicant returned to active duty with 2 years, 10 days adjusted date of separation in the grade of E-5.  Applicant received 25% time in grade of E-5 in accordance with AFI 36-26-4, para 8.4, 1 Jul 99 (Atch 2) which awards members 25% of time in grade if adjusted date of separation is more than 2 years but less than 4 years.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAO stated that based on the governing directive, the applicant’s date of rank was computed correctly; therefore they recommend his request be denied. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6 Dec 02 for review and comment.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his DOR for SSgt and EAD should be changed from 10 Feb 01.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  The applicant’s AF Form 3006, Enlistment Agreement, clearly indicates that he understood that he had no claim to a higher grade and that 10 Feb 01 would be his rank as well as his date of enlistment.  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 failed to sustain his burden that he has 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 a 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 02-02615 in Executive Session on 29 January 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPAO, undated, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 02.