Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-03766
Original file (BC-1996-03766.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  96-03766
            INDEX CODE:  131.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be given back the rank of staff sergeant (E-5).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In his transfer from the Navy Reserve back to the Air  Force  Reserve,
he lost two stripes.  His honorable discharge from  the  Navy  Reserve
shows him as an E-5.  He was an E-5 in the Marine Corps (active),  and
he was an E-5 from June 86 to Nov 93 in the USAFR.  He  lost  the  two
stripes in the transfer back to the Air Force Reserve in 1994 and  has
been trying to get the stripes back ever since.

In support of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  copies  of  his
honorable discharge certificates and an enlistment document.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 16 Dec 94 for a  period
of six years in the grade of airman first class (A1C).

A Classification/On-the-Job Training  Actions  Form,  dated  3 Apr 97,
indicates that the applicant’s Primary Air Force  Specialty  Code  was
changed from 2A633 to 2A653, effective 3 Apr 97.

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
that the applicant is currently serving in the Air  Force  Reserve  in
the grade of technical sergeant, having been promoted to that grade on
1 May 99.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Military  Personnel  Division,   HQ   AFRC/DPM,   reviewed   this
application and recommended denial.  According to DPM,  the  applicant
is not  eligible  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  staff  sergeant.
Specifically, the applicant has not attended the required Professional
Military Education (PME).

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant indicated that he is requesting the promotion based  on  the
fact that he had been an E-5 before.  He also stated that he completed
his 5-skill level career development courses (CDCs) and  attended  his
PME approximately 10 years ago.  He then completed his  7-skill  level
in approximately 1988.  He has since taken his 5-skill level CDC again
and attended PME in Nov 96.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant  to  Board’s  request,  HQ  AFRC/DPM,  again  reviewed   this
application recommended denial.  According to DPM, they were unable to
determine when the applicant served in the grade of E-5 based  on  the
paperwork he submitted.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Flight has
been contacted and they indicated that he completed his 5-skill  level
in Apr 97 and has recently completed his PME requirements in  Jul  98.
Consequently, he is now eligible and is projected for promotion  on  1
Sep 98.

A complete copy of the DPM evaluation is at Exhibit  F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  10
Nov 98 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit G).

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable 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 the Air Force
office of primary responsibility (OPR) 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  clear-
cut evidence that the applicant’s grade at the time of his  enlistment
in the Air Force Reserve in 1994 was erroneous, we find no  compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 13 Jul 99, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Cathlynn Sparks, Panel Chair
      Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member
      Mr. George Franklin, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Dec 96, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/DPM, dated 25 Feb 97.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Mar 97.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, applicant, undated.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFRC/DPM, undated.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Nov 98.




                                   CATHLYNN SPARKS
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9603766

    Original file (9603766.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to Board’s request, HQ AFRC/DPM, again reviewed this application recommended denial. The applicant’s Military Personnel Flight has been contacted and they indicated that he completed his 5-skill level in Apr 97 and has recently completed his PME requirements in Jul 98.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900711

    Original file (9900711.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00711 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Reports (OPRs), closing 30 Sep 95 and 30 Sep 96, be amended to include recommendations for professional military education (PME) and that he be considered for promotion to major by a Special Selection Board (SSB)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01469

    Original file (BC-2004-01469.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01469 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears he wishes to be reconsidered for a position vacancy (PV) promotion by a Special Review Board (SRB) for the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Reserve of the Air Force (ResAF) Major PV Board. No officer who failed to complete PME...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900044

    Original file (9900044.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    As a result, the commander gave the applicant an LOR, initiated an unfavorable information file (UIF) and recommended that his name be removed from the promotion list in accordance with AFI 36-2504. Air Mobility Wing (AMW) Public Affairs Office commander did not put pressure on the applicant to remove the female individual and that the applicant should have stressed the professionalism of his office staff and not allowed the closeness and familiarity of his staff to get out of control. A...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0000846

    Original file (0000846.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Available documentation indicated that the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 2 Dec 88 in the grade of airman for a period of six years. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s staff request, the Directorate of Military Law, AFRC/JAJM, reviewed this application and recommended denial. JAJM indicated that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800590

    Original file (9800590.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00590 (Case 3) INDEX CODE: 107.00, 111.00 COUNSEL: AREA DEFENSE COUNSEL HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Letter of Evaluation (LOE), AF Form 77 (Supplemental Evaluation Sheet), dated 7 Sep 96, be removed from his records; and, that he be provided a letter of apology from the evaluator (Lt Col K---) of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800509

    Original file (9800509.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00509 INDEX CODE: 136.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted an Air Force Reserve retirement based on 20 satisfactory years of service. A memorandum, dated 18 Dec 97, indicated that the applicant, with an expiration term of service (ETS) of 12 Dec 97, had failed to reenlist and that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00509

    Original file (BC-1998-00509.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00509 INDEX CODE: 136.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted an Air Force Reserve retirement based on 20 satisfactory years of service. A memorandum, dated 18 Dec 97, indicated that the applicant, with an expiration term of service (ETS) of 12 Dec 97, had failed to reenlist and that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802121

    Original file (9802121.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02121 INDEX CODE: 135.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect one (1) additional point to cover a “manday” for the time he spent at the USAF Academy Hospital, taking an Air Force Reserve mandated Cardiolite test. Accordingly, a majority of the Board recommends...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03845

    Original file (BC-2003-03845.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Counsel further asserts that because the instruction cited in the reprimand imposed on the applicant under Article 15 was not in effect at the time of the applicant’s alleged misconduct and there was no paragraph 5 as referred to, the reprimand was in error and constituted an erroneous basis for the discharge action subsequently initiated against the applicant. Counsel also asserts that the reprimand imposed on the applicant under Article 15 admonishes the applicant for misconduct that the...