Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03263
Original file (BC-2003-03263.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03263
            INDEX CODE:  131.04
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4) effective 12 Jul 03.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 12 Jul 03, she met the skill level, time in grade, and  time  in  service
criteria for promotion to E-4.  She was TDY at the time  and  the  paperwork
was overlooked until she returned to her duty station.

Her complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserves on 6 Apr 02  in  the  grade  of
airman first class (E-3).

In accordance with AFI 36-2505, table 4.2, airmen are promoted to the  grade
of senior when  they  attain  the  "3"  skill  level,  complete  1  year  of
satisfactory  service,  complete   8   months   time-in-grade   (TIG),   are
recommended by their supervisor, and approved by their  commander.   Note  1
of table 4.2 states that eligibility requirements must  be  met  as  of  the
last day of the month prior to the promotion month.  Note 3 states that  TIG
begins on the date the airmen enters the IADT  tour.   The  applicant  began
her IADT tour on 8 Nov 02 and completed the  8  months  TIG  requirement  on
8 Jul 03, rendering her eligible for promotion to E-4  during  the  next  (1
Sep 03) promotion cycle.  She was promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-
4) on 1 Sep 03.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/DPM recommends denial.  DPM states that  she  did  not  met  the  eight
months time in grade requirement as of 30 Jun 03 in accordance with AFI  36-
2502.  Therefore she was not eligible for the  1  Jul  03  promotion  cycle.
She was promoted on 1 Sep 03, which is the correct promotion cycle  for  her
circumstance.  The DPM evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on  7  Nov
03 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of  the  case;  however,  after  a
thorough review of the evidence of record, it appears that she did not  meet
the eligibility criteria for promotion to  senior  airman  during  the  July
cycle.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air
Force office of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of  an
error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find  no
compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief   sought   in   this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2003-
03263 in Executive Session on 9 Dec 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
      Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
      Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Sep 03.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFRC/DPM, dated 25 Oct 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Nov 03.




                                   ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02838

    Original file (BC-2003-02838.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of applicant’s appeal, he submitted a personal statement; an email, dated 19 May 03, from his military personnel flight to 4th AF/DPM concerning contractual errors; Reserve Order P- 045 reflecting promotion to staff sergeant, effective 1 Jul 91; copies of a 1 Sep 91 training certificate, a Report of Individual Personnel (RIP), dated 31 Jul 91, and a DD Form 2AF (Reserve) ID Card issued 17 Aug 91, all reflecting the rank of staff sergeant; copies of DD Form 214, Certificate of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01178

    Original file (BC-2003-01178.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 December 1994, the applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force for a period of six years. He was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard on 1 September 1995. Pursuant to the Board’s request, AFRC/DPM again reviewed this application and stated that the applicant was demoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4) because of unsatisfactory performance.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0000846

    Original file (0000846.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Available documentation indicated that the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 2 Dec 88 in the grade of airman for a period of six years. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s staff request, the Directorate of Military Law, AFRC/JAJM, reviewed this application and recommended denial. JAJM indicated that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03920

    Original file (BC-2003-03920.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00141

    Original file (BC-2006-00141.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates the applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of senior master sergeant, with a date of rank of 1 Mar 99. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/DPM recommends denial indicating that Air Force Reserve enlisted personnel are promoted in accordance with AFI...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01965

    Original file (BC-2003-01965.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. __________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 18 September 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard (ANG) at the age of 18 in the rank of airman basic (E-1) in the Air Force Specialty Code 43132E, Apprentice Strategic Aircraft Maintenance Specialist. On 9 November 2001, according to the Military Personnel Data System (MILPDS), the applicant enlisted in the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01995

    Original file (BC-2004-01995.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Instead, they record Army Reserve promotions under the grade of sergeant (E- 5) on a Department of the Army (DA) Form 4187, Personnel Action. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 2 September 2003, she enlisted in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of airman first class, with a date of rank of 8 July 2000, rather than in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00661

    Original file (BC-2002-00661.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In May 95, the Air Force Medical Review Board determined that he was medically disqualified for worldwide duty. By letter, dated 6 Feb 03, the Board’s staff requested that the applicant provide any and all pertinent records that he had in his possession, as well as any medical documentation from any private physicians who may have provided him medical treatment (Exhibit E). The Medical Consultant noted that the applicant’s heart attack triggered medical disqualification by the Air Force Reserve.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003222

    Original file (0003222.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    According to DPPPWB, based on the applicant’s DOR to senior airman of 15 Feb 00, the first time she will be eligible to be considered in the promotion process to staff sergeant would be cycle 01E5. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was promoted to the grade of airman on 15 Aug 97, rather than 15 Jul 97 when she would have completed the minimum six months TIG for promotion to airman. Exhibit D. Letter, applicant, dated 22 Jan 01.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-02949

    Original file (BC-2001-02949.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In order to qualify for the bonus, members in this AFSC located at McGuire had to reenlist for a period of six years (the applicant had reenlisted for two years on 13 Sep 01). In a letter dated 5 Oct 01 (Exhibit A), the UCA advised he had intended to counsel the applicant to delay reenlisting until the new bonus list came out on 1 Oct 01 to see if her AFSC would be on it. However, she was no longer eligible for the reenlistment bonus as she had since been reassigned to Willow Grove ARB...