AIR FORCE 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

JUL  1 4  

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03757 

COUNSEL:  None 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

reinstatement  of  his  tentative  selection to 
master sergeant for the 9739 promotion cycle. 

Applicant  requests 
the grade of chief 
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A .  
The  appropriate Air  Force  office  evaluated  applicant's request 
and provided  an advisory opinion to the Board  recommending the 
application  be  denied  (Exhibit C).  The  advisory  opinion  was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response  (Exhibit D). 
Applicant's response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. 

After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the 
available evidence of  record, we  find  insufficient  evidence of 
error or injustice to warrant corrective action.  The facts and 
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the 
evidence  of  record  and  have  not  been  adequately  rebutted  by 
applicant. 
Absent  persuasive  evidence  applicant  was  denied 
rights  to  which  entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not 
followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we  find- no 
basis to disturb the existing record. 

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 

The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will only be  reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 
Members  of  the  Board  Mr.  LeRoy  T.  Baseman,  Mr.  Gregory  H. 
Petkoff, and Mr.  Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application 
on  2 July  1998  in accordance with  the  provisions  of  Air  Force 
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing 

Exhibits: 
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinion 
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion 
E.  Applicant's Response 

Panel Chair 

DEPARTMENT  OF THE AIR  FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS AIR  FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER 

RANDOLPH AIR  FORCE BASE TEXAS 

2 2  JAN  1998 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCLDPPPW 

550 C Street West, Ste 09 
Randolph AFB TX 78150471 I 

SUBJECT:  Application for Correction of Military Records 

, 

Requested Action.  The applicant is requesting reinstatement of his tentative selection to 

CMSgt for the 97E9 promotion cycle. 

Reason for Request.  The applicant is requesting reinstatement of his promotion selection 

to put right the unjust situation that he and his family have had to endure due to an error on 
someone else’s part. 

Facts. - The applicant was a tentative promotion selectee to CMSgt for the 97E9 cycle 
(promotions effective Jan 98 - Dec 98).  His total score when tentatively selected, was 623.89 
and the score required for selection in his Chief Enlisted Manager (CEM) Code, 2A3X07 was 
also 623.89. When tentatively selected, he was credited with two Meritorious Service Medals 
(MSMs) (worth five points each) for a total of ten points. He actually had only one MSM worth 
a total of five points. When he was reconsidered (supplemental consideration) with one MSM 
and the erroneous five points subtracted h m  his original score of 623.89, he became a 
nonselectee. 

Discussion. 
a.  Since 1977 when the Air Force began using the current Senior NCO Promotion System 

(a combination weighted and board score), it has been well accepted by the enlisted force 
because it is a visible, fair, and equitable system.  Each member knows what factors are 
considered, the weight given to each, and how he or she scores relative to other eligibles. 
Verification of promotion data, before and after consideration for promotion, is essential in order 
to maintain the credibility of the Senior NCO Promotion System.  As a result, a series of checks 
and balances to include verification of individual data by each eligible prior to being considered 
for promotion, and subsequent verification of data pertaining to selectees by the Military 
Personnel Flight (MPF) is necessary. 

b.  One key aspect of the “selection for promotion” notification procedures is that 

commanders are permitted to announce selections to individuals concerned as “tentative” prior to 
the MPF officials compreting the detailed data verification process (promotion data is not 

verified by the MPF on nonselectees).  The 97E9 cycle, the cycle in question, was no exception. 
When an error is detected, appropriate action of course, must be taken in order to maintain the 
credibility of the Senior NCO Promotion System.  More specifically, if a member is selected 
based on erroneous Sonnation and when reconsidered the total score Wls below that required 
for selection, the member’s name is removed from the selection list.  Conversely, if it is 
determined that an individual should have been promoted but was not, appropriate action is taken 
to promote the member. 

c.  Approximately four to six months before selections are made for each cycle, each 

eligible is provided a Data Verification Record (DVR).  The purpose of the DVR is to let each 
member know what data will be used in hidher promotion consideration.  Performance Report 
ratings and closing dates, as well as decorations and other data, are depicted, as they are an 
integral part of the promotion process.  This computer produced product contains specific 
instructions which tells each member to review each factor for accuracy as it is critical to 
promotion consideration and if an error is detected, it should be brought to the attention of 
personnel in the servicing MF’F for correction or resolution.  This critical part of the promotion 
process is the responsibility of the member being considered.  The erroneous MSM was not only 
considered in the applicant’s promotion consideration for the last cycle when he was tentative 
identified as a selectee but in the previous cycle, 96E9, as well.  He had two opportunities to 
advise the MPF that one of the MSMs was erroneous.  He apparently did not do this and the 
result was that he was considered with erroneous data.  He was tentatively identified as a selectee 
and subsequently,  his selection was negated because he did not have the required amount of 
points to meet the score required for selection when he was reconsidered with the correct 
information. 

d.  The applicant states that he was deployed to Incirlick AB Turkey in August 1997 
when the Data Verification Records (DVRs) were distributed and that he and another Air Force 
member verified his data (27 Aug 97).  He states no errors were noted and all information 
appeared to be accurate.  We are unable to determine why it was necessary to discuss the data on 
his DVR with another member for verification when the DVR should have been produced at his 
servicing MPF approximately 20  Jun 97 (the data was flowed fiom Hq AFPC to servicing MPFs 
on 18 Jun 97 for creation of the DVRs), about six weeks to two months before he deployed.  It 
should have been available for his review and verification prior to his deployment. In addition, 
as previously indicated, we have verified the erroneous decoration was also reflected on his DVR 
for the previous cycle, 96E9, and apparently he did not bring it to the attention of MPF personnel 
for correction as was his responsibility. 

e.  The applicant has also  stated his name appeared on the world wide promotion list and 

all the normal celebration took place.  The situation through no fhult of his, has caused an 
immense amount of undue emotional stress for himself and his family as well as embarrassment 
and humiliation.  It is extremely unfortunate the decoration data was not corrected in the 
Advanced Personnel Data System (APDS) prior to 3 1 Oct 97, the date selections to CMSgt for 
the 97E9 cycle were done.  However, the applicant had the opportunity to have it corrected 
(erronhus decoration made available to him on his DVR for two promotion cycles) by advising 

his MPF and this was not done.  Had it been correct he would not have been identified as a 
tentative selectee to CMSgt far the 97E9 promotion cycle. 

Recommendation. Denial, based on the rationale provided. 

Chief InquiriedAFBCMR Section 
Airman Promotion Branch 

I