RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01514
			INDEX CODE:  131.04
			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank (DOR) to Senior Airman/E-4 be changed from 17 May 2002 to 1 August 2000.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He joined the Utah Air National Guard as an Airman First Class/E-3 with four years time in service (TIS) and three years time in grade (TIG).  He submitted a 3 Level Waiver that was approved.  However, the process took two years and delayed his promotion.  He was qualified when he joined in August 2000.

In support of his appeal, the applicant submits copies of his enlistment papers, memorandum approving his request for waiver and a copy of his promotion order AW-298, dated 17 May 2002.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the 151st Air Refueling Wing (ARW), Utah Air National Guard as an Airman First Class/E-3 on 10 August 2000.  He had 4 years TIS and 3 years TIG at the time of his enlistment and other than the 3-level waiver, was fully qualified to be promoted to the grade of Senior Airman/E-4.  The Base Education and Training Manger's (BETM) office initiated his 3-level waiver in August 2001, but it was returned because it was not complete.  In November 2001, the request was resubmitted to the National Guard Bureau (NGB).  On 19 December 2001, NGB notified the unit that the request lacked mandatory proof of certification.  The remaining proof of certification was accomplished on 10 March 2002 and the BETM resubmitted the package to NGB in March 2002.  The waiver was approved on 26 April 2002 and returned to the unit.  He was recommended for promotion on 16 May 2002 and he was promoted to SrA on 17 May 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ANG/DPPI recommends denial.  DPPI states the applicant enlisted in the ANG in accordance with (IAW) ANGI 36-2002, Enlistment, and Reenlistment in the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force, Table 1.9, Rule 4.  Which required SrA Lutter's date of rank be adjusted to reflect his date of enlistment.  He was not qualified for at least a 3 level AFSC for direct conversion.  A waiver was submitted, however the waiver was not timely approved because it lacked the necessary proof of certification.  Once the certification was secured, the waiver was approved and the member promptly promoted to the rank of Senior Airman.

ANG/DPPI’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He joined the Air National Guard as a ground radio technician after serving four years active duty in the United States Marine Corps as a radio technician and having worked as a civilian radio technician for nine years.  He requested a waiver for the ground radio repair course to be submitted by the unit.  The waiver was not acted on in a timely manner and the people submitting the waiver did not know the proper procedure for submitting a training waiver (Apparent from it having to continually be resubmitted).  He was asked for information on the waiver twice.  The initial gathering of information was provided by October 2000.  Nothing further was required from him until early 2001 when he was asked to be evaluated by a unit at Hill AFB, which he did within 2-3 weeks.  It is an injustice to enlist a fully qualified individual in the military and to take two and one half years to allow him to start progressing in rank.  Because of the Guard's delays and incompetence, he has lost 3 years TIG at enlistment and then left with 2 1/2 years of treading water when it comes to his career progression.

The applicant's complete response 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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case to include his contention the 5-Level waiver took over two years to process, thus extending his eligibility for promotion for the same amount of time; however, the majority of the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for their conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the majority of the Board finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01514 in Executive Session on 22 October 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

By a majority vote, the members voted to deny the request.  Ms. Carolyn B. Willis voted to correct the record and did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ANG/DPPI, dated 8 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Aug 03.
    Exhibit E.  Rebuttal, Applicant, dated 26 Aug 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
			FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of APPLICANT

	I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.

	Please advise the applicant accordingly.

							
							Director
							Air Force Review Boards Agency