RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01370
		INDEX CODE:  112.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her records be corrected to reflect she enlisted in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) rather than airman first class (E-3).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her nine years of weekend Reserve drills should have been included in determining her enlistment pay grade in the Regular Air Force.

In support of her appeal, the applicant provided an expanded statement, various certificates, her transcript, and other documents associated with the matter under review.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate she was honorably released from active duty on 15 Jul 00 under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (Completion of Required Active Duty Training) and transferred to the Air Force Reserve in the grade of staff sergeant.  She was credited with 1 year and 11 days of total active service, and 5 years, 3 months, and 17 days of total inactive service.

On 13 Mar 03, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force for a period of four years in the grade of airman first class (E-3).

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of airman first class (E-3), with a current grade date of rank (CGDOR) of 13 Mar 03.  Her Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 13 May 02.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPAE recommended denial noting that at the time of the applicant’s enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 13 Mar 03, she both initialed and signed an AF Form 3006 indicating she was enlisting in the pay grade of E-3, and that she had no claim to a higher grade.  According to AFPC/DPPAE, the applicant’s enlistment grade was determined in accordance with the governing directive and in a fair equitable manner.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPAE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In her response, the applicant indicated she recognizes she is legally obligated to serve her enlistment without claim to a higher grade.  However, she was influenced by her recruiter to believe she was a strong candidate for officer training school (OTS), and that by enlisting quickly, with an age waiver, she would be able to attend OTS in the near future.  She relied heavily on this belief when she signed her enlistment paperwork.  After her application was denied, she realized she would have to serve as an E-3 for a longer period of time than she originally intended.  For equitable purposes, and given her maturity, experience level, and prior educational background, she believes her enlistment pay grade should be reevaluated.  She served honorably in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of staff sergeant and merely asks to continue to serve in that grade while on active duty.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DPPAE and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence the applicant’s enlistment pay grade (E-3) in the Regular Air Force was erroneous, or she was treated differently from other similarly situated individuals, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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; 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-01370 in Executive Session on 22 Jul 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Apr 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAE, dated 10 Jun 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jun 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, applicant, dated 12 Jul 04, w/atch.