Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03148
Original file (BC-2003-03148.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

                            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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02531

    Original file (BC-2008-02531.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2005-03617.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2012-03835.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2005-01570.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2005-01693.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2004-03518.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2012-04737.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2004-01592.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (BC-2011-02105.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPB states that only the year of completion for the most recently completed degree is posted to an officer’s 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

    Original file (bc-2013-01202.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s 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...