RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02631
            INDEX NUMBER: 131.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade  of  senior
master sergeant (E-8) for cycle 01E8 in the Air Force Specialty Code  (AFSC)
8J000 (Correctional Custody) career field.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Through no fault of his  own,  and  despite  his  attempts  to  correct  his
records prior to  selections  during  cycle  01E8,  he  was  considered  for
promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant  in  the  wrong  AFSC.   He
should have been considered for promotion in AFSC 8J000  during  cycle  01E8
since  he  performed  the  duties  of  the  Superintendent  of   the   XXXXX
Correctional Custody Facility from 28 September 1999 to 5 February 2001.

Prior  to  promotion  selections  for  cycle  01E8,  he  reviewed  his  Data
Verification Record (DVR) and  discovered  that  his  AFSC  was  incorrectly
listed as his old AFSC (2E171).  He contacted his commander who took  action
to have the  error  corrected  prior  to  promotion  testing  and  promotion
selections for cycle 01E8.  He verified that his records had been  corrected
to reflect his duty and control AFSCs (DAFSC and CAFSC) as 8J000.   However,
when he tested his AFSC was still incorrectly listed as 2E171.   He  brought
this to the attention of the testing proctors and was told that  both  AFSCs
used the same version of the test.  The problem was mainly due to  the  fact
that he was under  a  wing  position  but  functionally  under  the  mission
support squadron.

In support of the appeal, applicant  submits  Enlisted  Performance  Reports
(EPRs)  reflecting  his  DAFSC  as  8J000,  statements  from  the   squadron
commander and command chief master sergeant, Unit Manning Documents  (UMDs),
and a Weighted Airman  Promotion  System  (WAPS)  testing  notification  for
cycle 02E8 listing his AFSC as 8J000.




Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s DAFSC history since 1993, follows:

            Effective Date        DAFSC

            10 Sep 93  2E171

            29 Sep 99  2E151

             1 Oct 99  8J000

             5 Feb 01  2E171

             1 Feb 03  2E171

            30 Jun 03  2E171

EPRs rendered for  the  period  29  August  1998  through  28 January  2001,
reflect his duty title as Superintendent,  Correctional  Custody  and  First
Term Airmen’s Center (FTAC), and his DAFSC as 8J000.

Applicant’s board scores, total scores, and  score  required  for  selection
are as follows:

      Cycle Board Score      Total Score     Cutoff Score

      01E8  307.50     551.01     659.37
      02E8  337.50     589.29     664.47
      03E8  330.00     590.86     668.78
      04E8  345.00     634.21     669.05

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPAAD recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
AFPC/DPAA did not approve applicant’s  release  or  the  CAFSC  change  from
2E171 to 8J000.  The 8J000 program is a  commander’s  optional  program  and
selection to fill funded billets is managed locally; however,  the  approval
authority  for  functional  release   is   AFPC/DPAA.    While   applicant’s
documentation clearly indicates he performed duties outside  of  his  CAFSC,
they  have  no  record  of  authorizing  his  release  for  a  Special  Duty
Identifier (SDI).  Even if his functional release  had  been  approved,  his
PAFSC would not have changed, only his CAFSC and DAFSC.

Although the UMD applicant provided reflects that a staff sergeant  position
existed, it does not justify placing a master sergeant 7-level against  that
position.  Further, the wing did not have any  funded  8J000  authorizations
from October 1999 to January 2001 and does not at this time.   According  to
Air Force Space Command (AFSPC), some of their  Military  Personnel  Flights
(MPFs)  erroneously  updated  individuals  to  8J000  because  members  were
performing duty at a temporary correctional custody facility and wanted  the
8J000 on their records because of the promotion opportunities.

The AFPC/DPAAD evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB recommends the application be denied and states, in  part,  that
neither AFPC/DPAAD nor applicant’s Major Air Command (MAJCOM) ever  approved
his release from AFSC 2E171 or that his AFSC be changed to 8J000.

The AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Peterson AFB out-sourced most  of  the  personnel  assigned  to  AFSC  2E1X1
during the 1998/1999 timeframe and the unit he was last  assigned  to  moved
to F.E. Warren AFB.  He was then triple billeted under AFSC 2E1X1 until  the
command chief asked if he would take on the correctional  custody  facility.
AFPC/DPAAD eludes to the fact that his  records  were  erroneously  updated,
disregarding or minimizing the documentation he has provided that shows  his
PAFSC, CAFSC, and DAFSC was 8J000 during the period  in  question.   He  has
provided evidence which demonstrates the wing had a funded slot and  he  was
assigned to that position.  AFPC/DPAAD correctly states  that  his  position
was funded as a staff sergeant slot, but that is  a  funding  issue,  not  a
manpower issue.  Furthermore, in 1998, it was a master sergeant  slot  until
the wing moved the funding for a master sergeant to the Honor  Guard.   This
was done to beef up the Honor Guard slot when it appeared  the  correctional
custody facility was about to close.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice  to  warrant  the  applicant’s  supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master  sergeant  in  Air
Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 8J000 for cycle 01E8.   The  applicant  contends
that through no fault of his own, and despite his attempts  to  correct  his
records prior to  selections  during  cycle  01E8,  he  was  considered  for
promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant  in  the  wrong  AFSC.   In
support of his request,  he  submits  Enlisted  Performance  Reports  (EPRs)
reflecting his DAFSC as 8J000, statements from the  squadron  commander  and
command chief master sergeant, Unit Manning Documents  (UMDs),  and  a  WAPS
promotion testing notification for cycle 02E8 listing  his  AFSC  as  8J000.
The evidence of record indicates that from 28 September 1999  to  5 February
2001, he  performed  the  duties  of  the  Superintendent  of  the  Peterson
Correctional Custody Facility in AFSC 8J000.  Although  AFPC/DPAAD  did  not
approve applicant’s release or the CAFSC change from 2E171 to  8J000,  based
on a preponderance of the evidence presented, a majority of the Board  finds
sufficient evidence that  he  was  led  to  believe  his  release  had  been
approved.  In view of this, and since he was performing duty  in  the  8J000
AFSC during the period in question, a majority of the Board  recommends  the
applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be provided supplemental consideration  for  promotion  to  the
grade of senior master sergeant in Air Force  Specialty  Code  (AFSC)  8J000
for cycle 01E8.

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent  to  supplemental
consideration that are separate and  apart,  and  unrelated  to  the  issues
involved in  this  application,  that  would  have  rendered  the  applicant
ineligible for the  promotion,  such  information  will  be  documented  and
presented to the  Board  for  a  final  determination  on  the  individual's
qualification for the promotion.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2004-02631
in Executive Session on 15 December 2004, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Frederick R. Beaman, III, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
                       Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member



By majority vote, the Board recommended to correct the record as  indicated.
 Mr. Beard voted to deny the application but  does  not  wish  to  submit  a
minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Aug 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAAD, dated 15 Oct 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 28 Oct 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Nov 04.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.




                                   FREDERICK R. BEAMAN, III
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2004-02631




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 XXXXXXX, be provided supplemental consideration for promotion
to the grade of senior master sergeant in Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC)
8J000 for cycle 01E8.

      If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to
supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to
the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the
applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented
and presented to the Board for a final determination on the individual's
qualification for the promotion.









JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency