RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00277
INDEX CODE: 131.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be promoted to the grade of master sergeant.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In 1945, while serving in the grade of sergeant at Kharagpur, India, he was
appointed as the Base Fire Chief by the engineering officer. He was told
that the Base Fire Chief must be a master sergeant and that a request would
be sent to Washington D.C. for promotion orders. Kharagpur was shut down
and he reported to Bengal Air Depot where he was appointed as the Base Fire
Chief. He served duties as a master sergeant but was never promoted.
In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, copies
of various separation documents, his service qualification record, and a
schedule of drills. His complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Data extracted from the available military records reflects that the
applicant was inducted in the Army Air Corps on 21 Mar 44 and honorably
discharged on 26 Jun 46, in the grade of sergeant. While on active duty he
served as a Sheet Metal Worker for 16 months and as a Fire Fighter for 7
months. He subsequently enlisted in the Army National Guard on 3 Jun 58
and was discharged on 2 Jun 61.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB recommends the application be time-barred. If the Board
decides to consider the case, denial is recommended based on a lack of
official documentation. The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant responded and reiterates that he was appointed the Base Fire
Chief and in accordance with the technical order, the person in that
position must be a master sergeant.
In support of his request, he provided a personal statement and copy of a
magazine article. His complete submission, with attachment, 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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, we are not
persuaded that he should be promoted to the grade of master sergeant.
Other than his own assertions, we see no evidence that he was recommended
for promotion to the grade of master sergeant or that the positions to
which he was assigned required that he be promoted to master sergeant.
Therefore, in the absence of documentary 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-2004-
00277 in Executive Session on 30 Jun 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 04, w/acths.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 19 Apr 04, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 10 May 04, w/atch.
BRENDA L. ROMINE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00184
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00184 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect senior airman, rather than airman first class. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01305
The applicant was the number one non-select of the seven individuals considered for promotion in his AFSC. There were seven eligibles in the 1A4X0 AFSC at the time selects were run on 29 October 2002, resulting in one promotion quota. The AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He feels the Air Force advisory has not addressed the issue of accountability to written Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01161
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Applicant states that no documented evidence exists that his performance had been anything less than exceptional. With the exception of the contested EPR closing 25 January 2000, applicant’s performance report from 1992 reflect an overall rating of “5”. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPEP reviewed this application and indicates that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00355
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant has not provided any documentation showing he was recommended for, or awarded, the DFC. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPWB states that a review of the applicant’s record indicates he was a POW from 13 April 1944 to 3 May 1945, approximately 13 months. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00188
In support of his request, applicant provided his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty; Western Union telegrams, his retirement order, and documents extracted from his medical record. DPPPR states to be awarded the PH a member must provide documentation to support that wounds were received as a direct result of enemy action and that the wounds received treatment by medical personnel. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 26 Apr 04, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03250
On 21 Jun 93, the applicant’s squadron commander notified her that he was considering whether to vacate the suspended punishment imposed on 15 Mar 93 for the alleged offenses of dereliction of duty and failure to obey a lawful general regulation. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLSA/JAJM recommends denial of the applicant’s requests. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04043
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The SWASM was awarded for serving in support of Operation DESERT SHIELD/STORM (ODS). There is no evidence in his records indicating he deployed in support of ODS. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-4043 in Executive Session on 30 Jun 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03357
The evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 6 February 2004, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. The applicant contends the contested EPR is unjust, she was given an initial feedback but never received a midterm, and she had no indication of substandard performance. We note she received promotion Below-the-Zone during...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03178
The approved body fat standard adjustment did not take place until after the failures and his promotion to the grade of master sergeant had already been rescinded. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was selected for promotion to the grade of master sergeant, but was rendered ineligible to assume the higher grade because of his failure to make satisfactory progress in the...
The applicant provided a 9 Oct 45 War Department document indicating that he was awarded the PH for wounds received in action on 13 Jun 43 in the European Theater. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, advised that, since the applicant was a POW for approximately 23 months, he meets the prerequisites for a POW promotion and recommends he be promoted to MSgt effective 24 Sep 45, one day prior to his discharge...