Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01179
Original file (BC-1998-01179.doc) Auto-classification: Denied




                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01179
            INDEX CODE:  131.05

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His date of rank (DOR) for promotion to airman (E-2) be  changed  from
20 Jan 98 to 7 Oct 97.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He started Basic Military Training (BMT) on 2 Apr 97 and  should  have
been eligible for airman on or about 2 Oct 97.  For reasons beyond his
control, such as a reorganization (changes in squadron leaders) in the
Security Forces Squadron  and  his  name  not  being  included  on  an
eligibility roster, he was not promoted when he was eligible.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided  a  letter  from  the
Security Forces Manager with a  1st  indorsement  statement  from  the
commander.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force.   Accordingly,  there  is  no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________




AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Special Actions & Personal Affairs, ANG/DPPU, reviewed this
application and indicated that after  review  of  Air  National  Guard
Instruction (ANGI) 36-2502 (Promotion of Airman, ANG),  the  applicant
did meet the eligibility for promotion on or about 7 Oct 97.  However,
just  because  an  individual  meets  the  eligibility  criteria   for
promotion does not mandate that they should be promoted  to  the  next
higher  grade  exactly  on  the  day  which  they   become   eligible.
Furthermore, no member is entitled to pay  and  allowances  simply  by
being eligible for promotion to the next higher grade.  The  applicant
has received the appropriate pay and allowances commensurate with  his
grade.   DPPU  further  states  that  the  Security   Forces   Manager
indicates, in his 2 Feb 98  letter,  that  applicant’s  name  was  not
included on an eligibility roster generated each month by  the  unit’s
Personnel Systems Management Branch.  The eligibility roster he refers
to is simply an administrative tool used by unit commanders to  assist
in determining which members of his/her organization are eligible  for
promotion.  DPPU recommends denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 7 Sep
98 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response  has  been
received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a thorough review
of the evidence of record  and  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that his DOR for promotion to airman should be changed  from
20 Jan 98 to 7 Oct 97.  We reviewed  the  statement  provided  by  the
Security Forces Manager and indorsed by the commander.  However,  this
statement is not sufficiently persuasive  to  override  the  rationale
provided by the ANG.  In this  respect,  while  it  appears  that  the
applicant did meet the eligibility for promotion on or about 7 Oct 97,
as noted by the ANG, just because an individual meets the  eligibility
criteria for promotion does not mandate that they should  be  promoted
to the next higher grade exactly on the day that they become eligible.
 Furthermore, we note the eligibility roster the applicant  refers  to
is simply an administrative tool used by unit commanders to assist  in
determining  which  members  of  the  organization  are  eligible  for
promotion.  In view of the foregoing, we  are  in  complete  agreement
with the recommendation of the ANG and adopt the  rationale  expressed
as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden that he has suffered either an error or  an  injustice  and
find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 10 May 1999, under the provisions  of  Air  Force
Instruction 36-2603:

                  Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                  Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
                Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner (without vote)

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Feb 98, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, ANG/DPPU, dated 17 Aug 98.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Sep 98.




                                   DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801179

    Original file (9801179.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01179 INDEX CODE: 131.05 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) for promotion to airman (E-2) be changed from 20 Jan 98 to 7 Oct 97. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Special Actions & Personal Affairs, ANG/DPPU,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9801062

    Original file (9801062.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01062 INDEX CODE 135.02 131.09 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade of E-7 be restored and he be awarded 13 additional points for the period 30 July 1996 to 29 July 1997 for a satisfactory year of Federal service, credited for 12 years, 4 months, and 19 days of prior active Federal...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802835

    Original file (9802835.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Commanders’ Programs Branch, AFPC/DPSFC, reviewed this application and indicated that although the applicant states that he was unable to take leave in Sep due to short-notice that he had to attend the SNCOA, this is not a valid reason to carry over more than 60 days into FY99. When they schedule leave in Sep, they risk losing days if unable to take the leave due to unforeseen circumstances...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01062

    Original file (BC-1998-01062.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01062 INDEX CODE 135.02 131.09 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade of E-7 be restored and he be awarded 13 additional points for the period 30 July 1996 to 29 July 1997 for a satisfactory year of Federal service, credited for 12 years, 4 months, and 19 days of prior active Federal...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 9800833

    Original file (9800833.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00833 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His date of rank (DOR) for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant, Air National Guard, be changed from 1 Sep 96 to 1 May 83, which would allow him to be promoted to the grade of technical sergeant effective 15 Nov 97. However, when he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003018

    Original file (0003018.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03018 INDEX CODE: 111.02, 134.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: An expired Unfavorable Information File (UIF), with a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) be removed from her records; the line in Section V (Rater’s Comments) of her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), closing 23 Apr 99, which made the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03451

    Original file (BC-2003-03451.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He had completed a total of 9 years and 27 days and was serving in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) at the time of discharge. At the time members are separated from the Air Force, they are furnished an RE code predicated upon the quality of their service and circumstances of their separation. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100151

    Original file (0100151.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was progressively promoted to the Reserve of the Air Force and Air National Guard grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5), with a promotion service date (PSD) of 11 Jan 87 and an effective date of 15 May 87. By ANG Special Order AP-124, dated 5 Jun 98, he was promoted to the Reserve of the Air Force and Air National Guard grade of colonel (O-6), with a PSD and effective date of 30 Jun 96. In the applicant’s case, as a colonel (O-6), he could have served to age 60 or 30 years of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703608

    Original file (9703608.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPPWB stated that, as evidenced by the special order awarding the applicant's AFCM, the decoration did not meet the criteria for promotion credit during the 96E7 cycle because the RDP date was 22 Aug 96--after selections were made on 25 May 96 for the 96E7 cycle. Exceptions to the above policy are only considered when the airman can support a previous submission with documentation or statements including conclusive evidence that the recommendation was officially placed in military channels...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9900881

    Original file (9900881.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The report was forwarded for senior rater endorsement and signed, dated 14 June 1997. The reaccomplished EPR should be removed from his record and replaced with the initial EPR signed and dated 2 June 1997, which accurately reflected his duty performance during the period in question. EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries, AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and states that the first time the report was considered in the...