RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04047
INDEX CODE: 100.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty, Item 11 - Primary Specialty be corrected to reflect the accurate
Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs) she performed in while on active
duty.
2. Applicant requests she be awarded an additional Oak Leaf Cluster
(OLC) to the Air Force Organizational Excellence Award (AFOEA).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Item 11 on her DD Form 214 was incorrect in that all of her AFSCs were
not listed and the time served in each AFSC was not accurate. The DD
Form 214, item 11 should read 70250A/3A051, Administrative Specialist,
3 years, 9 months; 67470 Cost & Management Analysis; 6F171 Financial
Analysis, 7 years; 6F071, Financial Management & Comptroller, 4 years
and 2 months. Her AFOEA should reflect two Oak Leaf Clusters.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on
28 February 1983.
The applicant was honorably retired on 30 November 2003. She served
20 years, 9 months and 3 days of active duty service.
The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects the applicant’s Primary
Specialty as 6F071 - Financial Management & Comptroller, 17 years and
2 months; 3A051 - Information Management, 3 years and 5 months.
On 10 March 2004, a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) was issued
correcting the applicant’s AFSCs.
The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects she was awarded the Air Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM), Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) with
three Oak Leaf Clusters (3 OLCs), Non Commissioned Officer
Professional Military Education Ribbon with 1 OLC, National Defense
Service Medal (NDSM) with one Bronze Star (1 BS), Air Force Overseas
Short Tour Ribbon, Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM) with 1 BS, Air
Force Training Ribbon, Air Force Longevity Service Award with 4 OLCs,
Air Force Organizational Excellence Award, with 1 OLC, Air Force
Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA), Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM)
with 5 OLCs, Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), and the Basic
Information Management Badge.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPAC states a review of the documents the applicant initially
submitted substantiates her request. Her records reflect she
performed duties in AFSCs 6F071, Financial Management and Comptroller
Craftsman; 6F171, Financial Analysis Craftsman; 67470, Cost Analysis
Technician; 70250, Administration Specialist; and 70250A,
Administration Specialist, Administration Management. On 1 November
1999, AFSC 6F171 was deleted from the enlisted classification
structure and converted to 6F071. On 1 November 1993, AFSC 67470 was
also deleted and converted to 6F171. On 1 May 1985, AFSC 70250A was
deleted from the enlisted classification structure and converted to
70250. On 1 November 1993, 70250 was deleted from the enlisted
classification structure and converted to 3A051. The applicant did
not perform any duties in AFSC 3A051. DPPAC does not support granting
the specific relief requested by the applicant, however, they
recommend the applicant’s request be corrected as follows.
6F071 - Financial Management and Comptroller Craftsman,
4 years, 1 month
6F171 - Financial Analysis Craftsman, 13 years, 1 month
70250 - Administration Specialist, 1 years, 5 months
70250A - Administration Specialist, Administration
Management, 2 years.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
HQ AFPC/DPPPR states a review of the applicant’s records indicate she
is not eligible for an additional oak leaf cluster for the AFOEA.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and submitted copies
of Airman Performance Reports (APRs) reflecting the AFSCs she
performed in while on active.
_________________________________________________________________
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 a thorough review of the
applicant’s records and the evidence provided it appears the
applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty, Item 11 - Primary Specialty has been administratively
corrected by the issuance of the DD Form 215 on 10 March 2004.
Although the corrected AFSCs are not exactly in line with the
applicant’s requests, she has not established that the corrections are
inaccurate. Therefore, we find no basis to recommend additional
corrections. Regarding the applicant’s remaining request for an
additional oak leaf cluster for her AFOEA, a review of the applicant’s
performance reports and other documents does not support the request.
Therefore, 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-
2003-04047 in Executive Session on 21 April 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Member
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Nov 03.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPAC, dated 29 Jan 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 1 Mar 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Mar 04.
Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03764
DPPPR states that in accordance with DoD 1348.33-Manual, Chapter 4, “the JMUA, awarded in the name of the Secretary of Defense, is intended to recognize joint units and activities for meritorious achievement or service, superior to that which is normally, expected.” After consultation with the Joint Staff and researching DOD 1348.33-M Appendix C, DoD Activities Awarded the JMUA; and the Air Force Unit Awards Database their office located 2 awards of the JMUA to AFELM NATO AWACS E-3A for the...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1994-02626A
In an application, dated 28 Apr 98, the applicant provided additional information and requested the above corrections to his record (Exhibit F). A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit G. The Chief, Evaluation Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPE, reviewed this application and indicated that the PRF is the responsibility of the senior rater and unless proven otherwise, they consider it to be an accurate reflection of the officer’s record of performance. ...
In an application, dated 28 Apr 98, the applicant provided additional information and requested the above corrections to his record (Exhibit F). A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit G. The Chief, Evaluation Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPE, reviewed this application and indicated that the PRF is the responsibility of the senior rater and unless proven otherwise, they consider it to be an accurate reflection of the officer’s record of performance. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02683
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. As to whether some individuals were incorrectly promoted because they were “lucky” enough to be identified in the wrong CAFSC, promotion selections are “tentative pending verification by the MPF” (AFI 36-2502) and airmen are not “to assume the grade when data verification discovers missing or erroneous data.” Therefore, if an IDMT serving...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02353
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. We therefore conclude the fair and right thing to do is to recommend the 4N0X1C members be given supplemental consideration in the CAFSC 4N0X1 for the 05E6/05E7 promotion cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03823
Not every IDMT-qualified member was identified, mostly because they were not in an IDMT position. Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. As to whether some individuals were incorrectly promoted because they were “lucky” enough to be identified in the wrong CAFSC, promotion selections are “tentative pending verification by the MPF” (AFI 36-2502) and airmen are not “to...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02440
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. We therefore conclude the fair and right thing to do is to recommend the 4N0X1C members be given supplemental consideration in the CAFSC 4N0X1 for the 05E6/05E7 promotion cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02310
Not every IDMT-qualified member was identified, mostly because they were not in an IDMT position. Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. As to whether some individuals were incorrectly promoted because they were “lucky” enough to be identified in the wrong CAFSC, promotion selections are “tentative pending verification by the MPF” (AFI 36-2502) and airmen are not “to...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02349
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. We therefore conclude the fair and right thing to do is to recommend the 4N0X1C members be given supplemental consideration in the CAFSC 4N0X1 for the 05E6/05E7 promotion cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02361
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. Complete copies of the applicant’s responses, with attachments, are at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB advised that prior to the start of the promotion cycle, CFMs are advised that if they feel it is appropriate for the suffix and “slick” AFSCs...