RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03148
INDEX CODE: 131.03
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be promoted to the rank of Master Sergeant (MSgt) (E-7) effective 1 May
2003.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was told to disenroll from the Professional Military Education (PME)
course, Non-Commissioned Officer Academy (NCOA), when she transferred to a
new unit of attachment. After attempting to re-enroll in the course at her
new unit, she was informed that because she chose to disenroll, she would
have to wait one year before she could repeat the course. She enrolled
again after waiting a year and was sent course materials. After completing
the course and passing the tests, she submitted her package for promotion
to the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) to be considered for promotion
to MSgt. ARPC notified her that she was not qualified because she had
mistakenly been enrolled in and completed the Senior Non-Commissioned
Officer Academy (SNCOA) course instead of the required NCOA and was
referred to the ARPC Promotions Section. The Promotion Section told her
that as long as she had completed a higher-level course (SNCOA) she did not
have to go back to complete NCOA. She was instructed to write a note to
the Promotion Board explaining the situation. Later, when her name did not
appear on the MSgt promotion list she contacted ARPC again and was told she
was not selected because her Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) card had
expired. She explained she had already submitted paperwork to renew her
EMT card, so ARPC told her if she could get the renewed card to ARPC before
1 July 2002, she would be selected for promotion. She took steps to ensure
the EMT card was there prior to the deadline. ARPC then informed her that
there was still a problem with her not taking the NCOA course. She was
instructed to contact the Education and Training Office and was told again
that she could be promoted because she had taken the higher-level PME. She
contacted ARPC after 4 July 2002 after discovering that her paperwork was
not processed for promotion. The Education and Training Office told her
that they had given her the wrong information and that she could not be
promoted without the completion of NCOA. She was told her only option was
to apply to the BCMR.
She has been given a lot of bad information concerning her eligibility for
promotion. However, she is not totally blaming everyone else. She admits
she failed to notice that the course she completed was the SNCOA instead of
NCOA. Taking the course may have been her mistake; however, passing the
course was not. She feels she is deserving of promotion to MSgt and wishes
the BCMR to consider her case.
In support of her application, she provides a personal statement. The
applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s military personnel records were not provided. The Military
Personnel Database (MilPDS) indicates the applicant is currently serving in
the rank of technical sergeant (TSgt) (E-6) with a date of rank of 2
November 1996 and assigned to a MSgt (E-7) authorization as an Individual
Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) Reservist. MilPDS indicates the applicant has
13 years of satisfactory federal military service as of 18 March 2003. She
is serving as a medical services technician.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPB recommends denial of the applicant’s request. DPB states that the
applicant was enrolled in the PME course, SNCOA, in error while serving as
a technical sergeant. AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 4.2,
Rule 6, states the required level of PME for promotion to master sergeant
is NCOA. The applicant has not completed this course. The confusion
concerning promotion with completion of SNCOA is based on an exception
listed in Table 4.2, Note 8, which states: “Do not promote an enlisted
member to MSgt unless they complete NCOA. EXCEPTION: If the airman
satisfactorily serves in a higher grade and completes SNCOA course
requirement.” The applicant completed SNCOA; however, it does not appear
that she ever served in a grade higher than technical sergeant. DPB’s
states that while it is commendable that the applicant completed a more
senior PME course, she does not meet the requirements of AFI 36-2502 by
completing the appropriate level of PME. The DPB evaluation is at Exhibit
D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3
October 2003, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice warranting corrective action. After reviewing
the evidence presented, we are of the opinion that approval of the
requested relief is appropriate. We note the repeated misinformation the
applicant was given concerning her eligibility for promotion to MSgt.
Through no fault of her own, the applicant was sent the SNCOA
Correspondence Course instead of the NCOA Correspondence Course. After
completing the course, she was told more than once that she could be
promoted because she had completed a higher-level PME. Through good faith,
she complied with other promotion requirements, when requested of her, to
complete her eligibility. In light of the above, we believe the applicant
has been the victim of an injustice and recommend that she be promoted as
an exception to policy. Therefore, her records should 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; she was promoted to the Reserve
grade of master sergeant, effective and with a date of rank of 1 May 2003.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 20 November 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. Albert Ellet, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following
documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-03148 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 03 w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 29 Sep 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Oct 03.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2003-03148
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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that she was
promoted to the Reserve grade of master sergeant (E-7), effective and
with a date of rank of 1 May 2003.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02531
On 31 July 2007, the applicant retired in the grade of TSgt after serving 20 years and 6 months on active duty, _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. Furthermore, had the request for a waiver been approved, which would have been no more than a deferment requiring completion of PME within 179 days of pin-on, she would also have had to serve a two-year active duty service commitment in order to retire in that...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03617
On 4 April 2001, the applicant was notified by her commander of her academic release from the NCOA and of the convening of an Academic Review Board. Based on the applicant’s DOR to TSgt, the first time she was considered for promotion to MSgt was cycle 02E7. The applicant was academically released from the NCOA and the CEPME commander denied the appeal.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03835
The applicant failed to complete the required mandatory PME or receive an approved waiver prior to his 28 Jul 12 retirement. Airmen with approved waivers must attend PME, in the higher grade, within 179 days of their effective promotion date, or as soon as they are available without impacting the mission. The DD Form 214 will reflect the active duty grade the member held at time of separation/retirement and the retirement order will reflect the rank as "highest grade held on active...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01570
The Military Personnel Database (MilPDS) indicates the applicant is a member of the Air Force Reserve currently serving in the grade of Master Sergeant (MSgt) (E-7) with a date of rank of 1 May 2005. DPB explains the applicant’s name did not appear on the HQ AETC promotion list for promotions effective 1 March 2005. Novel, Panel Chair Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 May 05 w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01693
For airmen who meet eligibility requirements, the immediate supervisor recommends promotion on AF Form 224, Recommendation and Authorization for Promotion of Airman as Reserve of the Air Force. According to the 7 Apr 04 report, MSgt C was the rater and Chief A was the additional rater. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He should have received an initial and...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03518
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reiterated her original contentions that her records should be corrected to reflect her promotion to master sergeant effective as of 1 September 2004. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that her assertions, in and by themselves, are sufficiently persuasive...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04737
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial, indicating the applicant became ineligible for promotion and did not hold the grade of senior master sergeant prior to her retirement. Wing commanders or equivalent have authority to grant or deny waivers of...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01592
DPB states AFI 36-2502 requires that as of the last day of the month prior to promotion, a member meet all eligibility conditions and be assigned to a higher graded position for promotion. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force evaluation applicant provided documentation extracted from the military pay and personnel system, Leave and Earning Statements, a statement from the Reserve Affairs...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02105
DPB states that only the year of completion for the most recently completed degree is posted to an officers OSB. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded by reiterating her original contentions, however, she states that she feels she was not provided the same opportunities as others who sought promotion and career advancement due to in part the lack of information she was able to access on her own...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc-2013-01202
He was set-up by Chief Master Sergeant M----- and the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) Headquarters personnel in retaliation for filing a CI. On 2 Oct 06, the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) disapproved the applicants application for retirement submitted on 31 Jan 06 and stated that retirement at this time was not considered in the best interest in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket...