Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01536
Original file (BC-2005-01536.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01536
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  10 NOV 2006


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the rank of technical sergeant (TSgt) retroactive
to 1 Dec 03.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been grandfathered to the rank of Technical Sergeant
(E-6) in Dec 03.  He completed all requirements  for  E-6  and  has
17.4 years of Reserve and active duty combined.

In support of  his  appeal,  applicant  submitted  a  copy  of  his
AF Form 526, ANG/USAFR Point Credit Summary, dated 8 Feb 04.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Base on available records,  the  applicant,  was  an  Active  Guard
Reserve (AGR) enlisted member with 17 years of satisfactory federal
service.  He entered his last enlistment in the Air  Force  Reserve
on 25 Sep 01 for a period of six years.  His highest grade held was
staff sergeant with an effective date and date of rank of 1 Mar 00.


On 27 Apr 05, he was permanently  retired  for  disability  with  a
disability rating of 60%.  Special  Order  ACD-00503,  prepared  on
4 Apr 05, reflects he  was  credited  with  a  total  of  9  years,
5 months,  and  5  days  of  active  service  for  retirement.   He
completed 23 years, 9 months, and 16 days of service for basic pay,
which included 17 years of satisfactory federal service.

___________________________________________________________________




AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFRC/DPM  reviewed  this  application  and  recommended  denial,
stating, in part, applicant states he  completed  all  requirements
for promotion to include over 17 years of satisfactory service  and
should have been promoted to the rank of TSgt  under  the  Extended
Promotion Program (EPP).

Air Reserve enlisted personnel who have 16  years  of  satisfactory
service for retirement and are blocked for promotion under the unit
vacancy promotion program may be considered for promotion to  TSgt,
IAW AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, based on EPP.   Enlisted
personnel must be blocked from promotion, meet eligibility criteria
outlined  in  AFI  36-2502,  Table  4.2,  be  recommended  by   the
supervisor  and  approved  by   the   unit   commander   (promotion
authority).  It is solely the duty of the unit commander to  render
the decision to promote an individual based  on  personnel  meeting
eligibility requirements as of the last day of the month  prior  to
the  promotion  month.   There  is  no  evidence  to  support   the
applicant’s claim that he should be grandfathered/promoted  to  the
rank of TSgt under EPP.

A complete copy of the 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 9 Dec 05 for review and comment within  30  days.   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 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.  No evidence has been submitted  to  substantiate  his  claim
that he met the eligibility requirements for  promotion  under  the
Extended Promotion Program, in accordance  with  AFI  36-2502.   We
therefore agree with the opinion  and  recommendation  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 error or injustice.  In view of the above, 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-2005-01536 in Executive Session on 24 January  2006,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
      Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member
      Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 05, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPM, dated 4 Dec 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 05.




                                   MARILYN M. THOMAS
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0000846

    Original file (0000846.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Available documentation indicated that the applicant enlisted in the Air Force Reserve on 2 Dec 88 in the grade of airman for a period of six years. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s staff request, the Directorate of Military Law, AFRC/JAJM, reviewed this application and recommended denial. JAJM indicated that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01418

    Original file (BC-2005-01418.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    [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 | CY1999 | 9801102

    Original file (9801102.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant was nominated for promotion to the grade of MSgt under the PEP with an effective date f o r promotion of 1 April 1997. 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00365

    Original file (BC-2007-00365.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states that at the time he was considered for promotion to MSgt, he had more than 12 months left until retirement. Counsel opines that based on the stipulations in AFI 36-2502 and AFRC 36-2102, the Air Force could have, and should have, granted the applicant the promotion to master sergeant (MSgt). The waiver was denied because the applicant would have only been able to perform duty as a MSgt for 10 months before reaching his mandatory retirement at High Year of Tenure Date of 20 Mar 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02838

    Original file (BC-2003-02838.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of applicant’s appeal, he submitted a personal statement; an email, dated 19 May 03, from his military personnel flight to 4th AF/DPM concerning contractual errors; Reserve Order P- 045 reflecting promotion to staff sergeant, effective 1 Jul 91; copies of a 1 Sep 91 training certificate, a Report of Individual Personnel (RIP), dated 31 Jul 91, and a DD Form 2AF (Reserve) ID Card issued 17 Aug 91, all reflecting the rank of staff sergeant; copies of DD Form 214, Certificate of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00361

    Original file (BC-2005-00361.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He reported for duty and performed a weekend duty trip that was not reflected on his point summary. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Based on the evidence of record and that verified by HQ Air Force Reserve Command (HQ AFRC), it appears the applicant has received credit for all participation performed during the Retirement Year Ending (RYE) 17 Jan 01.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02697

    Original file (BC-2002-02697.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Every time the promotion issue came up he was told that he needed to complete Senior NCO Academy (SNCOA). 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 that absent supportive evidence from his commander recommending the applicant for promotion, favorable consideration of his request is not warranted. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03238

    Original file (BC-2011-03238.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his requests, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of the Memorandum for Non-recommendation for Promotion, his 2 Nov 08 PT score, Member Utilization Questionnaire, email communiques, EPP Eligibility Rosters, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, a Point Credit History Summary, and various other documents associated with his request. The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01941

    Original file (BC-2006-01941.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The evidence of record reflects the applicant’s AFSC was withdrawn for failing to progress in upgrade training, which resulted in removal of his line number. ___________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. B. J. WHITE-OLSON Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2006-01941 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03954

    Original file (BC-2005-03954.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03954 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 Jun 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) (Second Oak Leaf Cluster) (2OLC) awarded to him for the period 1 Apr 98 to 26 Apr 02 be used in the promotion process for cycle 05E7...