RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01418
INDEX NUMBER: 131.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 Oct 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be updated to reflect four awards of the Air Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM) rather than three. [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.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He found the original copies of the four AFAMs he has been awarded.
When he tested for promotion to the grade of master sergeant (MSgt) (E-
7) in Jan 03, his score sheet only reflected two AFAMs. He found two
more AFAMs in his personal records on separate occasions. The local
Military Personnel Flight has updated one of the medals. He would
like the second medal added to his record. The two AFAMs provide him
with enough points for selection for promotion to the grade of MSgt.
In support of his appeal, applicant provides copies of his decoration
citations and a copy of his Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS)
Score Notice.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 14 Dec 84. He
retired effective 1 Jan 05 in the grade of technical sergeant (TSgt).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial of the applicant’s request for
supplemental promotion consideration. The applicant had ample time
and opportunity to discover/identify the missing decorations during
the data verification process for cycle 03E7 and before retiring 31
Dec 04. In accordance with AFI 36-2502, paragraph 2.3.4.2, to be
eligible for promotion consideration, an airman must review their data
verification rip (DVR) and report any errors to the military personnel
flight (MPF).
The first time the missing citations would have been used in the
promotions process was cycle 03E7 (promotions effective Aug 03-Jul
04). The applicant’s total score was 329.93 and a score of 331.18 was
required for selection in his AFSC. Had the two AFAMs been updated,
his total score would have been 331.93, rendering him a select to the
grade of MSgt for cycle 03E7.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
24 Jun 05 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response
has not been received.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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 the victim of an error or injustice. We note that the
appropriate Air Force OPR has administratively corrected the
applicant’s record to include the referenced decorations. However,
we do not believe the decorations should be used retroactively in the
promotion process. In our view the applicant has failed to present
sufficient evidence that he exercised due diligence to ensure his
records were correct when competing for promotion. Should the Board
promote the applicant to the grade of MSgt, he would be granted
retirement in a grade in which he never served. Additionally, if he
were reinstated to active duty, the two-year active duty service
commitment (ADSC) he would be required to serve would start on 1 Jun
04 and likely will have expired by the time he actually reentered
active duty. We do not believe the circumstances of his case warrant
his retroactive promotion and the potential windfall that would
result from it. 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 probable 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-2005-01418
in Executive Session on 11 August 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
Ms. Sue A. Lumpkins, Member
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Apr 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 25 May 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jun 05.
MARILYN M. THOMAS
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02799
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB advised that the applicant was erroneously considered, tested, and selected for promotion to MSgt during cycle 05E7 in AFSC 2T1X1. Based on the 14 Dec 04 promotion testing notification, and data listed in the MilPDS and the WAPS, the applicant was erroneously considered, tested, and selected for promotion in his 2T AFSC to MSgt during cycle 05E7. We therefore recommend he be provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02046
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close out date of the decoration must be on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD), and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), or in this case the AF Form 3994, must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01028
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01028 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Special Order G-065 dated 17 February 2004, awarding him the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be corrected to reflect the date of the original Recommendation for Decoration Printout (DÉCOR 6) requested in October 2002. ...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02723
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-2005-02475
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-2005-02253
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-2005-02365
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-2005-02349
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-2005-02353
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...