DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AFBCMR 98-01529
JUN 3 0 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States
Code, Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured
the
compliance with the provisions of the above regulation,
decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military
Records is announced, and it is directed that:
The pertinent militar
ment of the Air
Force relating to
be corrected to
show that he was not released from active duty on 31 March 1998
and retired for.length of service on 1 April 1998, but on
3 1 March 1998 he was continued on active duty and ordered
permanent change of station to his home of record/home of
selection pending further orders.
--
P ir Force Board for Correction
ief Examiner
of Military Records
t
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC
JUM 3 0 1998
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AFBCMR 98-01529
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR
SUBJECT:
Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with
the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale
expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has
been the victim of either an error or an injustice.
under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's
records will be corrected as set forth in the accompanying
Memorandum for the Chief of Staff signed by the Executive
Director of the Board or his designee.
Therefore,
L* Panel Chair
Attachment:
Ltr, AFPC/DPPRR, dtd 11 Jun 98
a
D E P A R T M E N T OF THE A I R FORCE
H E A D Q U A R T E R S AIR FORCE P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R
R A N D O L P H AIR FORCE B A S E TEXAS
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPRR
550 C Street West, Suite 11
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-47 13
11 Jun 98
SUBJECT: Application for Correction of Military Records
Requested Action. Applicant is requesting reinstatement to active duty based on
supplemental promotion for cycle 97E9.
Basis for Reuuest. Applicant is requesting the above action based on the
correction of an Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing out May 96. He was
provided supplemental promotion consideration for cycle 97E9 and selected for
promotion to CMSgt with a promotion sequence number of 5 18.5, which has not yet been
incremented.
Discussion. Applicant voluntarily retired fiom the Air Force effective 1 Apr 98,
after serving 21 year 00 months and 24 days active service. This was strictly a voluntary
action on the applicant’s part because he could have remained on active duty until he
reached his high-year tenure point at 26 years of active service. On 8 Mar 98, an Enlisted
Performance Report (EPR) was corrected by the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board
(ERAB). Based on the correction, applicant was considered for supplemental promotion
to CMSgt and selected for promotion to CMSgt for cycle 97E9. Based on his promotion,
applicant is requesting reinstatement to active duty.
Recommendation. None; however, we have no objection to applicant’s
reinstatement. If the decision is to grant the relief sought, the record will need to be
corrected to show applicant was reinstated to active duty and the retirement orders dated
17 Oct 97 (Special Order No. AC-000847) will need to be rescinded. Applicant would be
promoted to CMSgt when his promotion sequence number (518.5) is reached.
i. Directorate of Personnel Program Management
,/ Retirements Branch
Available Master Personnel Records C. Advisory Opinions D. E. F. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions Addendum to Air Force Advisory Opinion AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion D E P A R T M E N T O F T H E A I R F O R C E H E A D Q U A R T E R S A I R F O R C E P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R R A N D O L P H A I R F O R C E E A S E T E X A S MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 12 Jun 98 FROM: HQ AFPCDPPPEP 550 C Street West Ste 07 Randolph AFB TX 78 150-4709 SUB cords (DD Form 149) REQUESTED ACTION:...
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 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. The applicant is requesting reinstatement of his tentative selection to CMSgt for the 97E9 promotion cycle.
He also directed that the applicant be provided supplemental promotion consideration with her corrected record. On 5 Dec 96, the Board recommended that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect that the EPR rendered for the period 31 Mar 90 through 18 Feb 91 be accepted for file in its proper sequence; that the EPR rendered for the period 31 Mar 90 through 18 Jun 91 be amended in Section I to show the period of the report as 19 Feb 91 through 18 Jun 91 and the reason for the report as...
The applicant filed two similar appeals under AFI 3 6 - 2 4 0 1 , Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, which were denied by the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB). The applicant requests the Board upgrade his 24 Jun 95 enlisted performance report (EPR) to a “5” in Section IV, Promotion Recommendation. The additional documentation he has submitted still by this “policy” regarding individuals who received an Article 15 (or that it ever existed).
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00743
He receive supplemental promotion consideration for promotion to the grade of Chief Master Sergeant (E-9) by the promotion cycle 97E9. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 4 May 1998 for review and response within 30 days. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the contested report be...
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and indicated that the contested report would normally have been eligible for promotion consideration for the 96E7 cycle to master sergeant (promotions effective Aug 96 - Jul 97). Consequently, he was ineligible for promotion consideration for the 96B7 cycle based on both the referral EPR and the PES Code “Q”. Even if the board directs removal of the referral report, the applicant would not...
He receive supplemental promotion consideration for promotion to the grade of Chief Master Sergeant (E-9) by the promotion cycle 97E9. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 4 May 1998 for review and response within 30 days. In view of the foregoing, we recommend the contested report be...
On 9 September 1997, the applicant wrote to the 39th Wing IG alleging he had experienced reprisal by his squadron commander for giving a protected statement to an IG investigator during a separate IG investigation on 15 and 19 July 1997. The applicant alleged the squadron commander withheld a senior rater endorsement to [the EPR in question]. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed...
Attachment: Ltr, AFPClDPPPW, dtd 15 Sep 98 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, D. C. NOV 19 1998 Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 98-01940 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code, Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and having assured compliance with the provisions of the above regulation, the decision of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records is announced, and it is directed that: The pertinent military...
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, AFBCMR Appeals and SSB Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPAB, states that the previous and subsequent EPRs that applicant submits are not germane to this appeal. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states, in summary, that the statements he submitted all agree that the contested report was not written accurately and did not include specific...