Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03140
Original file (BC-2004-03140.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03140
            INDEX CODE:  131.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he was promoted to  the  grade  of
airman first class (A1C) after his graduation from  Jet  Aircraft  and
Engine Mechanics School.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes he was cheated out of a promotion that he truly  deserved.
After his graduation from school, he was  promoted  to  the  grade  of
airman second class (A2C).  However, since he was an  honor  graduate,
he should have been promoted to A1C.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate he  enlisted
in the Regular Air Force on 20 Mar 52 for a period of  four  years  in
the grade of airman basic.  He attended Jet  Engine  Mechanics  School
from Jun 52 to Sep 52.  He was honorably discharged on 19 Mar 56 under
the provisions of AFR 39-10 (Expiration Term of Service) in the  grade
of staff sergeant (SSgt).  He was credited with fours years of  active
service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommended denial indicating they have requested that the
applicant  provide  additional  documentation  (promotion  orders)  to
support his appeal but have not received a  response.   Based  on  the
limited documentation,  they  could  not  determine  if  or  when  the
applicant should have been promoted to the grade of A1C.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  29
Dec 04 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  After careful  consideration  of
applicant's request and the limited documentation which was available,
we find insufficient evidence of error or  injustice  to  warrant  any
corrective action.  Based upon the presumption of  regularity  in  the
conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence to the  contrary,
we assume the applicant’s promotions during his military service  were
proper and in compliance with appropriate directives.   Therefore,  we
find no basis upon which to favorably consider 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 15 Feb 05, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
      Mr. Robert H. Altman, Member
      Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2004-03140 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Oct 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 10 Dec 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Dec 04.




                                   ROBERT S. BOYD
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03391

    Original file (BC-2005-03391.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03391 INDEX CODE: 131.09 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 MAY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the rank of E-4, Sergeant, effective at the time of discharge. Applicant states, he was told that he would be promoted to E-4, on his DD Form 214, but...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00503

    Original file (BC-2004-00503.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00503 INDEX CODE: 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be changed to indicate he received a 5-skill level in his Air Force Specialty (AFS) and that his pay grade be changed to senior airman (SRA/E-4). DPPPWB states that although he met the time in grade and time in service...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00075

    Original file (BC-2006-00075.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the applicant had not been court-martialed and reduced to the grade of AB, he would have been promoted to the grade of SRA on 16 Feb 04, provided there were no ineligibility conditions and he had the recommendation of his commander. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB notes the applicant’s incorrect promotion to airman and A1C and provides details regarding the applicant’s promotion eligibility and the pertinent DORs based on various circumstances. A...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01781

    Original file (BC-2004-01781.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2004-01781 INDEX CODE 131.00, 105.01, 100.06 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank of senior airman (SRA) be restored so that he may continue his military career, having completed the Return to Duty Program (RTDP). He successfully completed the program in Jan 03 and was returned to duty...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03461

    Original file (BC-2003-03461.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Other than his own assertions, there is no indication in the record before us that that the rater did not have reasonable information available concerning the applicant’s performance during the contested rating period on which to base a reasonably accurate assessment. Additionally, we note that the rater on the contested report was in the applicant’s rating chain on the preceding report which, in our view, supports the position that the rater was familiar with the applicant and was aware of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00427

    Original file (BC-2006-00427.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for upgrade of discharge to honorable and change of reenlistment eligibility code on 16 October 1975 (Exhibit B). On 9 February 1978, the Air Force Discharge Review Board again considered all the evidence of record and concluded that the applicant should receive an honorable discharge. He was successfully treated for this alcoholism while hospitalized at the Kingsbridge VA Hospital in Bronx, New York from 8 August 1976...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03591

    Original file (BC-2003-03591.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03591 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade of senior airman (E-4) be reinstated. On 21 January 2003, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to impose nonjudicial punishment on him under Article 15, UCMJ. After reviewing the applicant’s submission and the evidence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01985

    Original file (BC-2004-01985.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01985 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be changed in item 25a, Specialty Number and Title, to reflect an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 43230, Jet Engine Mechanic, rather than 70250,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03818

    Original file (BC-2003-03818.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03818 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: By amendment at Exhibit F, he asks that his Promotion Sequence Number (PSN) 6991 to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) for promotion cycle 03E6 be reinstated. After thoroughly reviewing the applicant’s submission and the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02493

    Original file (BC-2004-02493.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    Since the applicant was in confinement until 7 May 2003, he was not eligible for promotion to airman until 8 May 2003 (6 months’ TIG) and was eligible for promotion to A1C on 8 March 2004 (10 months’ TIG). We note that in his current grade of airman first class, he reaches his Expiration Term of Service on 8 December 2004 and must separate. Therefore, after weighing the evidence presented, we believe a more equitable remedy would be to provide the applicant the opportunity to reenlist with...