RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01460
INDEX NUMBER: 131.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 Nov 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The deceased member’s grandson (applicant) requests that his
grandfather (member) be promoted to the grade of master sergeant
(MSgt) (E-7).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When the member left the US Army, he left at the grade of MSgt, but
the highest grade he held in the Air Force was technical sergeant
(TSgt) E-6. The applicant has several evaluations rendered on the
member over a long period of time with high marks where no promotion
was given. If the member has earned the grade of MSgt, the applicant
believes he should then be given it.
In support of the appeal, the applicant has submitted a copy of the
member’s death certificate and copies of his airman performance
reports (APRs).
The complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The member served on active duty in the US Army from 1940 to 1945 and
separated in the grade of private first class. On 11 Feb 48, he
entered active duty in the Air Force and was promoted up to the grade
of technical sergeant (TSgt). On 26 Aug 69, the member was placed on
the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) due to a diagnosis of
chronic duodenal ulcer. On 29 Jun 71, he was removed from the TDRL
and was honorably retired in the grade of TSgt on 30 Jun 71.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial of the applicant’s request. Promotions
during the timeframe the applicant is requesting a promotion were made
at the Major Command (MajCom), unless delegated to the Wing, Group, or
Squadron levels. To be considered for promotion to the grade of MSgt,
an individual must have had 24 months time-in-grade, possess a 7-skill
level Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), and be recommended by the
commander. These were the minimum eligibility requirements to be
considered for promotion, but in no way ensured or guaranteed a
promotion. A thorough review of the member’s records reveals no
documentation indicating he ever served or was promoted to the grade
of MSgt (E-7) while in the Army or the Air Force. There is nothing
that indicates he was the victim of an error or injustice that
prevented his promotion.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
In response to the Air Force evaluation the applicant indicates that
AFPC/DPPPWB has the wrong impression of the “whole situation.” He
indicates the issue of the member’s promotion only came to light two
years ago and that trying to obtain the information needed is not that
easy. He requests that the Board review the records as he believes
his grandfather has completed the minimum requirements to be promoted
to MSgt. The applicant indicates he is not asking for back pay. He
asks that the Board grant the relief requested based on the evidence
submitted and the fact that his grandfather served for over 30 years
of active duty service.
The complete response 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 agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air
Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the
primary basis for our conclusion that the member has not been the
victim of an error or injustice. While the Board appreciates and
respects the member’s service to his country, promotions, just as
today, were granted in accordance with strict governing procedures
that served to ensure fair and equitable consideration for all
eligible. There has been insufficient evidence presented to support
a position that the member did not receive fair and equitable
consideration for all promotions he may have been eligible or that he
was ever promoted to the grade of master sergeant during his career.
Additionally, as pointed out by AFPC/DPPPWB, the member’s military
personnel records also do not confirm such a promotion. 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 Docket Number BC-2005-
01460 in Executive Session on 21 July 2005, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member
Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Apr 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 17 May 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 May 05.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Jun 05.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02228
They also stated his request for promotion to TSgt should be denied based on merit as they found nothing in his record to indicate an error or injustice was made that prevented him from being promoted or considered for promotion. The DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 18 Aug 06, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01418
[Examiner’s Note: AFPC has administratively corrected the applicant’s record to reflect four awards of the AFAM] He be promoted to the grade of master sergeant (MSgt) as if selected during cycle 03E7. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the primary basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03617
On 4 April 2001, the applicant was notified by her commander of her academic release from the NCOA and of the convening of an Academic Review Board. Based on the applicant’s DOR to TSgt, the first time she was considered for promotion to MSgt was cycle 02E7. The applicant was academically released from the NCOA and the CEPME commander denied the appeal.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01236
Amendment SO ACD-00565, dated 26 January 2007 pertaining to applicant's placement on the temporary retired file, effective 20 January 2007 reflects he retired in the projected higher grade of SSgt. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, after reviewing the evidence of record we agree with the opinions and recommendations 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...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01397
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served 23 years of continuous active duty service during which time he received only one senior noncommissioned officer promotion (SNCO) to master sergeant (MSgt). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01507
In support of his request, the applicant provided a statement in his own behalf. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the active duty Air Force on 14 Jul 52 and was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt). The application has not been filed within the three-year time limitation imposed by AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, paragraph 3-5.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00792
DPPPWB notes there is nothing in the applicant’s record to show he was ever promoted to a grade higher than MSgt. They cannot verify whether the applicant was ever considered for promotion to the grade of Senior Master Sergeant since promotion files are only maintained for a period of ten years. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00919
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on the addition of the Air Force Commendation Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster (AFCM, 1 OLC), and the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), he would have been selected for promotion to the grade of master sergeant prior to his retirement since he missed promotion by 1 point or so. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. However, based upon the presumption of regularity in the...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01133
Applicant was considered for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), and selected, by the 92A6 promotion cycle with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 October 1991. Subsequent to the applicant’s retirement from the Air Force on 1 January 1996, he was awarded the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) for the period 2 March 1986 to 31 December 1990, for meritorious service, per Permanent Orders 310-01, dated 6 November 1997. As stated by AFPC/DPPPWB, had the Defense...