ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00040
INDEX CODE: 110.03, 105.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. He be reinstated to the grade of staff sergeant.
2. In the alternative, if the Board elects to not reinstate him to the
grade of staff sergeant, he be promoted to the grade of senior airman so
that he may separate and join the Air Force Reserves.
3. In an addendum to his request, the applicant states that he would be
willing to remain in the Air Force and serve the rest of his career on
active duty if promoted to the grade of senior airman.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was found guilty by general court-martial of two
specifications of stealing property from the government and sentenced to
confinement for 12 months, a bad conduct discharge, reduction to the grade
of airman basic, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and a fine of
$7,200. On 25 Aug 00, he entered the Return-to-Duty Program (RTDP) and
graduated on 13 Mar 01. On 23 Apr 01, the Air Force Clemency and Parole
Board approved his return to duty and on 23 Apr 02 that part of his
sentence directing bad conduct discharge was remitted.
On 27 Aug 02, the applicant's request that he be reinstated to the grade of
staff sergeant was considered and denied by the Board. However, the Board
agreed with the suggested alternative presented by the Air Force and
granted a high-year-of-tenure (HYT) waiver changing his HYT from November
2002 to December 2005, thus allowing him the opportunity to earn back the
grades he lost.
The Record of Proceedings, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.
On 13 Sep 02, the applicant provided additional information and requested
reconsideration of his application. The applicant stated that he did not
receive the Air Force evaluation and did not have the opportunity to submit
a response. He contends that the relief that has been granted in his case
would cause a personal hardship. He is currently an E-2 with a wife and
four children. His military work schedule does not permit him to work a
consistent number of hours on his two additional jobs. An extension of his
HYT date at his current grade would not give him the opportunity to test
for staff sergeant until the year 2005. The applicant requested that the
HYT extension decision be reversed so that he could separate from the Air
Force and seek employment elsewhere. In the alternative, the applicant
request that he be promoted to the grade of senior airman. Doing so would
allow him to separate from the Air Force and continue his military career
by serving in the Air National Guard or in the Air Force Reserves.
In an email communication to the Board, the applicant stated that if the
Board were to decide to promote him to senior airman, he would be willing
to remain on active duty. The applicant requests that if promoted, his
date of rank and effective date be established as 1 Sep 02.
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an injustice warranting his promotion to the grade of senior
airman. While the Board remains unpersuaded that reinstatement to the
grade of staff sergeant is warranted because of the serious nature of the
offenses he committed, the Board majority believes that it would not be
unreasonable to grant partial relief of the applicant's request. In this
respect, the Board majority believes that his reduction in grade has caused
an undue financial hardship on the applicant and his family, and that it
would be an injustice for him and his family to continue to suffer the
adverse effects of that burden. The Board majority believes that the
applicant has demonstrated the ability to perform at a level far above that
of his peers and notes that he has obtained the unequivocal support of
senior Air Force officers in his chain of command. Therefore, the majority
of the Board recommends his record be corrected to the extent indicated
below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was promoted to the grade of
senior airman (E-4) effective and with a date of rank of 1 September 2002.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-00040 in
Executive Session on 4 Oct 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member
By a majority vote the members voted to grant his request for promotion to
the grade of senior airman. Mr. Baxter voted to deny his request in its
entirety and did not desire to submit a minority report. The following
documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 27 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Sep 02, w/atch.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
AFBCMR 02-00040
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was promoted to the
grade of senior airman (E-4) effective and with a date of rank of 1
September 2002.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
His reduction to the grade of E-1 be remitted and he be reinstated to the grade of staff sergeant. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial. If the Board feels it is in the best interest of the Air Force to retain the member, it should restore his grade to staff sergeant or grant a HYT waiver to extend him until December 2005.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02003
On 27 Aug 02, the applicant's request that he be reinstated to the grade of staff sergeant was considered and partially granted by the Board. JA states his current commander is correct that AFI 35-205 does not prohibit Airmen from promotion consideration when they are returned to duty after completing the RTDP. The JA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: His return to duty and suspended...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844
The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00344
However, the Board decided to grant the applicant a measure of relief based on clemency and promoted him to the grade of senior airman with a DOR of 1 Oct 03, which allowed him an opportunity to test for promotion to the grade of SSgt and allow him to retire in that grade. They further note that HYT extensions are designed to address specific problems and issues, not to allow a member the opportunity to test for the next higher grade, which they believe the applicant’s request is based on. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00223
On 10 Sep 03, the Board did not restore his SSgt grade but instead promoted him to senior airman effective 9 Apr 03 and waived the HYT restriction so he could be eligible for promotion consideration by the 04E5 cycle. His present reenlistment (RE) code of 4D renders him ineligible to reenlist because of HYT restrictions, i.e., he has not yet been promoted to SSgt. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPRR notes the applicant is not reenlistment eligible,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01741
The applicant’s performance reports and numerous awards are provided at Exhibit B. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB advises that, based on the applicant’s current and DOR of 9 Apr 03 for airman, the earliest cycle he would be eligible for promotion consideration to SSgt would be 07E5. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01075
AFI 36-2606 states that the appeal authority for individuals like the applicant with more than 20 years of service would be his group commander. Based on HQ AFPC/DPPRRP’s advisory (Exhibit E), the group commander’s Military Personnel Flight (MPF) contacted the HQ AFPC retirements section to advise that the group commander was going to complete the AF Form 418. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB advises the applicant was...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02856
Therefore, he was not eligible for promotion to airman until that date. He is granted a waiver and is eligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force. He is granted a waiver and is eligible to reenlist in the Regular Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02697
Every time the promotion issue came up he was told that he needed to complete Senior NCO Academy (SNCOA). 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 that absent supportive evidence from his commander recommending the applicant for promotion, favorable consideration of his request is not warranted. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02083
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 3 Sep 04 for review and response. The evidence of record indicates the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for stealing a military cellular phone and fraudulently obtaining cellular services. ...