RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03031
INDEX CODE: 131.05
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His date of rank (DOR) and effective date to Technical Sergeant (E-6)
be changed from 1 September 2003 to 1 November 2001.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On assignment to the 98th Flight Training Squadron (FTS) at the US Air
Force Academy (USAFA), he was given the wrong Air Force Specialty Code
(AFSC) of J2A774, Survival Equipment. Since he was never qualified in
the erroneous AFSC, he was placed in a training status and therefore
not eligible for promotion. He notes the reason this issue has taken
so long to identify and resolve is because he is a full time student
at the University of Southern California (USC), located approximately
1000 miles from the 98th FTS. Consequently, because of the distance
involved, he was not able to garner the support required from his
program managers.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of a
redacted Special Order (DA-00658) assigning him to the 98th FTS, a
Report on Individual Personnel (RIP) from the Personnel System, and an
email chain between the applicant and USAFA personnel.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was assigned to the 98th FTS effective 20 December 2000.
He was assigned to Survival Equipment, AFSC J2A774, with a 1-skill
level. Through administrative action, his AFSC was changed to a
Primary AFSC (PAFSC) of J8B000 (Parachutist Training Inspector) and a
secondary AFSC of J1T051 (Test Parachutist).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPB recommends denial. Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2502,
Chapter 4, Table 4.2, states that promotion to TSGT (E-6) requires a 7-
skill level in the PAFSC (waivable if applicant’s AFSC contains
Special Duty Identifier (SDI) - which applicant’s does), 18 Months
time-in-grade (he met this requirement on 1 Nov 01), 5 years
satisfactory service, meet weight/body standards, and be recommended
by the supervisor and approved by promotion authority. The applicant
did not have a 7-skill level in either his PAFSC or his secondary
AFSC. He submitted a waiver of the 7 skill level based on his AFSC
containing an SDI. The final requirements of a supervisory
recommendation and promotion authority approval, though late, were met
in time for applicant to be promoted to TSgt effective and with a DOR
of 1 September 2003.
DPB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant, in response to ARPC/DPB’s advisory, has requested an
amendment to his DD Form 149. He had originally asked that the DOR be
changed from 1 September 2003 to 1 July 2001. He is now asking that
the DOR be changed from 1 September 2003 to 1 November 2001, the
actual date he met the time-in-grade requirement for promotion to
TSgt. He has attached supplemental documentation for the Board’s
review that he feels demonstrates his proficiency in the Air Force
Specialty Code he should have occupied when he was assigned to the
98th Flying Training Squadron (FTS) on 20 December 2000.
Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. He was assigned to a
misrepresentative Air Force Specialty (AFS) in error and consequently
was placed in training status rendering him ineligible for promotion.
He has shown he was fully qualified in the proper AFS and has since
managed to have his record changed to reflect such. Therefore, we
recommend that the records be corrected as 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
reserve grade of technical sergeant effective and with a date of rank
of 1 November 2001 rather than 1 September 2003.
______________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 10 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. J. Dean Yount, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 24 Sep 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Oct 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 1 Nov 03, w/atchs.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
BC-2003-03031
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 reserve grade of technical sergeant effective and with a date
of rank of 1 November 2001 rather than 1 September 2003.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02315
DPPAOR states that in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2604, Service Dates and Dates of Rank, paragraph 8.4, the applicant’s date of rank was computed correctly. DPPPWB states that based on the applicant’s adjusted DOR, the first time he was eligible for promotion consideration to TSgt was cycle 03E6 (promotions effective August 2003 - July 2004). If the Board grants the applicant’s request to change his DOR to 19 September 1999, he would receive 28.5 weighted points for TIG and...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03920
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/DPM recommended denial noting the applicant was in a retraining status at the time of her promotion to TSgt and did not have a three- skill level in the promotion AFSC as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. AFRC/DPM indicated that as a result of the applicant’s DOR being changed to 1 Mar 02, she did not meet the two- year minimum time in grade requirement for promotion to the grade...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02811
The commander was told that since the applicant was a ten year First Sergeant who did not hold a 9- skill level she could not remain a CMSgt and that there was not a method for First Sergeants to be promoted to CMSgt. A complete copy of the rebuttal is at Exhibit F. ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicants MILPDS record was reviewed and noted as follows: 16 Jan 03, member last held AFSC 2A671; 17 Jan 03, member was selected into a SDI 8F000 (First Sergeant); 1 Mar 11,...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00284
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00284 INDEX CODE: 100.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 Aug 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered by the Calendar Year 2005 (CY05) Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Continuation Board with a Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) of 14N4 (Intelligence) rather than...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01267
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01267 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (TSgt) (E-6) effective the first promotion cycle he tested without his 7- skill level. Members compete for promotion in the CAFSC they hold as of the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECOD) for a...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02286 COUNSEL: MAJ THOMAS L. FARMER HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive a direct promotion to master sergeant with an effective date of promotion and a date of rank as a promotee in the SDI 8J000, Correctional Custody career field for 1998 or 1999. The applicant believes that two of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02110
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPMB advises that enlisted personnel who are projected for promotion while on active duty do not carry that projected promotion to the Air Force Reserve. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that his active duty projected promotion should be transferred to the Reserve. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00137
His commander received an informal email in late November 2002 requesting that an Officer Performance Report (OPR) be prepared for the February 2003 major board. Since he is no longer a member of the Air Force Reserve as a result of the two nonselections, he is not eligible for consideration by a Reserve promotion board. All of the officers selected for promotion by the FY03 board had completed SOS and 94% of the officers selected by the FY04 board had completed SOS.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03355
DPB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Regarding the timeliness issue, the applicant argues that the DD Form 149 states the relevant date for submitting a BCMR application is within three years of “…the date of discovery of the alleged error occurred.” He believes he is inside the three-year window as he received notification of his erroneous DOR on 1 October 2000 and signed his...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02848
He reviewed his record prior to the promotion board and at the time he had the understanding that his record was correct. After reviewing the evidence of record, we note that the applicant's PAFSC, as reflected on his OSB, was incorrect when he was considered for promotion by the FY03 major selection board. MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2002-02848 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...