RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02592
INDEX CODE: 131.00, 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior
master sergeant for cycle 02E8, with inclusion of the Air Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM) in his records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Members who review their records and ensure they are current should be
allowed the same consideration as members who have their entire
records available to the promotion board. This was not the case in
this instance. The board only saw a decoration was awarded, however,
the board had no information available concerning the merit of the
award. Because the award was listed on the promotion brief, HQ AFPC
denied the initial request for supplemental consideration.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the
grade of master sergeant.
The applicant’s total promotion score for the 02E8 was 637.71 and the
score required for selection in his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC)
was 649.44.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB states prior to determining what factors would warrant
supplemental promotion consideration, several evaluation board members
were queried in order to determine what they felt were valid reasons
to authorize supplemental promotion consideration. Based on their
recommendations, the reasons outlined in AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion
Program, Table 2.5, 1 July 1999, were developed. A review of the
applicant’s selection folder reflects that the AFAM was included on
the Senior NCO Evaluation Brief and reviewed by the evaluation board.
A decoration is not considered missing if the citation or order is
filed in the folder or if the decoration was listed on the brief used
by the board. The evaluation board, which convened on 23 January
2002, reviewed his record and assigned the 382.50 board score with
full knowledge of the decoration. Consequently, no further
consideration by an evaluation board is either appropriate or
authorized. Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant‘s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 4 October 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
applicant for review and response within 30 days. 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 error or injustice. After reviewing all the
evidence, we are not persuaded that approval of the requested relief
is warranted. The applicant argues that the absence of the citation
for the AFAM from his selection record caused his record to be
inaccurate to a degree requiring supplemental consideration for
promotion to senior master sergeant for cycle 02E8. After reviewing
the available record, we disagree. The applicant’s accomplishments
while performing duties in Bosnia, for which he was awarded the AFAM,
are discussed in detail in his EPR closing in September 2001. In view
of this fact and because the award was listed on his Senior NCO
Evaluation Brief, it is our opinion that the Senior NCO evaluation
board had adequate information at their disposal upon which to base a
reasonably accurate assessment of the applicant’s promotability in
relation to his peers. Based on the above and in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, the applicant’s request is not favorably
considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 evidence not considered with this application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application on 19
November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Ogla M. Crerar, Panel Chair
Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member
Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Aug 02.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 16 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Oct 02.
OGLA M. CRERAR
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02705
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02705 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt) for cycle 02E8 with his record corrected to include the citation for the Air Force Commendation Medal, Third...
In support of his request the applicant provided documentation from the awarding authority indicating that if the EPR had been a "5" at the time it was originally rendered, he would have awarded the applicant an AFCM and subsequently upgraded the medal. Therefore, we do not believe it is necessary to recommend supplemental consideration for these cycles. ALBERT F. LOWAS, JR. Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-01144 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that a servicing MPF fails to respond to an official AFPC request for required documents on eligible members should not negatively impact any member’s full promotion consideration. The Air Force states that the citation for the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01102
AFI 36-2502, Table 2.5 states, that supplemental consideration is not authorized if the citation or order was filed or if the decoration was listed on the brief used by the board, was developed through consultation with evaluation board members who determined that either update of the decoration or actual citation filed in the SNCO selection folder was sufficient for a thorough evaluation of the record. A review of the applicant’s selection folder reflects that the MSM (1OLC) was filed in...
DPPPWB stated a review of the applicant’s HQ Air Force Selection Folder reflects that the citation for the JSAM was filed in his selection folder on 16 October 1998. Therefore, a majority of the Board recommends that the applicant be given supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant with the citation for the JSAM included in his records. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01619
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01619 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 November 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive supplemental promotion consideration for the 07E8 cycle to senior master sergeant (E-8), with the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) 3rd Oak Leaf Cluster (3OLC) citation...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03629
Therefore, the applicant’s information was not updated in the promotion files and her records were not considered during the 02E8 promotion board. DPPRRP states that at the time the applicant withdrew her retirement, established procedures required the MPF to notify AFPC/DPPWB (promotions) when a member withdrew their retirement, making them eligible for promotion testing. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01960
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close out date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DECOR-6, must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. No evidence was presented which showed to the Board majority’s satisfaction that the decoration was placed in official channels prior to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02410
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02410 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant during promotion cycle 02E8 with a date of rank and effective date of 1 Sep 02. If the Board believes an injustice exists and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03428
He requested a new retirement date of 1 Jul 03. First, he states that the cause of the “glitch” is blamed on his retirement date cancellation not making it through the system in time, when the fact is, regardless of whether he cancelled his retirement date, he was under Stop Loss and was eligible to compete for promotion, so his retirement flowing through the system should not have mattered. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or...