RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02650
            INDEX CODE:  111.02, 131.03

      XXXXXX     COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 Feb 07

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  He receive supplemental promotion consideration to the  grade  of  chief
master sergeant beginning with cycle 00E9.

2.  Corrections be made to his Enlisted Performance Reports  (EPRs)  closing
6 Jul 98, 19 Jan 99, 30 Sep 99, 30 Sep 00, and 30 Sep 01 and a final EPR  be
rendered upon his retirement.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

As result of a previous AFBCMR correction of his record,  dated  28 Apr  04,
he received supplemental promotion consideration  to  the  grade  of  senior
master sergeant.  He was retroactively selected for promotion  and  given  a
Date of Rank (DOR) of 1 Feb 99.  He retired from the Air  Force  on  31  Jul
03.  His new DOR made  him  eligible  for  consideration  for  chief  master
sergeant beginning with promotion cycle 00E9 through 02E9.  However, he  was
informed by AFPC/DPPPW that since he did not have a United States Air  Force
Supervisory Exam (USAFE) for E-9 on file, he  could  not  be  supplementally
considered for promotion.  Had the original error not been  in  his  record,
he would have remained in service until the end of his  high  year-of-tenure
and taken the USAFE.

Applicant states he is willing to make himself available to  report  to  the
nearest Air Force installation for the purpose  of  taking  the  appropriate
USAFE examinations.  If allowable, DPPPW could use the USAFE scores  he  had
while testing for E-8 or he would even be willing to  return  to  duty.   If
the Board concurs with  his  request,  he  also  asks  his  EPRs  and  other
applicable documents be corrected to show the corrected rank.

In support of his request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement  and
documentation associated  with  the  previous  correction  to  his  military
records.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  23  Feb  77  and  was
progressively promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant with a DOR  of
1 Jun 01.  He voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 31  Jul  03,  having
served 26 years, 5 months, and 8 days on active duty.

As result of  a  previous  AFBCMR  appeal,  he  was  awarded  an  Air  Force
Commendation Medal and provided supplemental  promotion  consideration.   He
was retroactively selected for promotion  to  the  grade  of  senior  master
sergeant for cycle 97E8 and given a new date of rank of 1 Feb 99.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB  recommends  denial.   DPPPWB  states  he  was  ineligible   for
promotion to chief master sergeant prior to his retirement date, because  he
had never taken the USAFSE for chief master sergeants, which is an  integral
part of the weighted factors and the senior NCO selection process.   Without
a USAFSE test  score,  it  is  not  possible  to  provide  him  supplemental
consideration for any previous promotion cycles.  The total score  from  the
USAFSE test score and other weighted factors is subtracted from  the  cutoff
score to determine what board score he would have required  to  be  selected
during  the   initial   selection   process.    There   are   currently   no
procedure/policies to consider members without a test score for promotion.

The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPP recommends partial relief.  DPPP concurs with  the  applicant  his
EPRs closing between 6 Jul 98 through 30 Sep 00 should be corrected and  the
30 Sep 01 EPR be voided.  DPPP states  he  was  time-in-grade  eligible  for
senior rater endorsement based on the new DOR at the time of the 30  Sep  01
report.  He was not afforded  the  opportunity  to  obtain  the  appropriate
signatures, therefore the report is invalid and should be removed  from  his
records.  DPPP recommends  denial  of  his  request  that  a  final  EPR  be
directed from his last duty  assignment.   All  reports  are  optional  upon
retirement and are up to the rater to accomplish the report.  If he is  able
to contact the evaluators himself  and  provide  a  substitute  report  with
supporting documents from the evaluators,  then  DPPP  recommends  accepting
the report for file.



The DPPP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He has contacted the  appropriate  individuals  and  they  have  agreed  and
encouraged him to have the 30 Sep 01 EPR  reaccomplished  and  forwarded  to
them for signatures.  Instead of declaring the report invalid, he  asks  the
Board to accept the reaccomplished EPR with the appropriate signatures.   He
repeats his offer to make himself available to take the  USAFSE  examination
since  there  currently  are  no  procedures/policies  to  consider  members
without a test score for promotion.  Not taking the USAFSE  examination  for
E-9 was not his choosing but due to an error or injustice as  found  in  his
previous AFBCMR case.

Applicant’s complete response 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.  In this respect, we  note  that  based  on
the applicant’s original 1 Jun 01 date of rank (DOR) to the grade of  senior
master sergeant, he was ineligible for promotion consideration to the  grade
of chief master sergeant prior to his 31 Jul  03  retirement.   However,  as
result of a previous AFBCMR appeal, he was provided  supplemental  promotion
consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant for cycle 97E8 and  was
retroactively selected for promotion, establishing a new DOR  of  1 Feb  99.
Although his new DOR made him eligible for promotion  consideration  to  the
grade of  chief  master  sergeant  beginning  with  cycle  00E9,  AFPC/DPPPW
informed him that since he was never  administered  the  United  States  Air
Force Supervisory Exam (USAFSE) he could not receive supplemental  promotion
consideration for this cycle.  In view of the foregoing, and  in  an  effort
to offset any possibility of an injustice, we recommend he be  provided  the
USAFE study guide, given a period of 90-days to study/prepare  for  testing,
and be administered the USAFE.  We further recommend that  his  USAFE  score
be used to provide him supplemental promotion consideration to the grade  of
chief master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle  00E9.
 In addition, the EPRs rendered during the period 7 Jul 97  through  30  Sep
00 should be corrected based on his retroactive promotion to  the  grade  of
senior master sergeant.  Since his new DOR makes him time-in-grade  eligible
for senior rater endorsement on the EPR closing 30 Sep 01  and  he  was  not
afforded an opportunity to obtain the appropriate signatures, we  also  find
this report to be in error and recommend it be  removed  from  his  records.
Although he requests a reaccomplished report, with  appropriate  signatures,
be accepted for file, he has failed to provide such a document.   Should  he
do so, we would  reconsider  this  request.   Therefore,  we  recommend  his
records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or injustice to warrant directing that  a  final  EPR  be
rendered by his last duty assignment upon his retirement.  We note that  all
reports are optional upon retirement and it is  at  the  rater’s  discretion
whether or not a report will be rendered.  The applicant has not provided  a
reaccomplished report or supporting statements  from  the  rating  officials
for this period.  Therefore, based on the evidence before  us,  we  find  no
basis upon which to determine the rater’s decision to not  render  a  report
upon  the  applicant’s  retirement  was  in  error  or  unjust.   Since  the
applicant  indicates  the  rating  officials   have   agreed   to   sign   a
reaccomplished report and AFPC/DPPP  recommends  accepting  the  report  for
file if he is able  to  provide  one  with  supporting  documents  from  the
evaluators, should he provide such evidence,  we  would  favorably  consider
this request.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

      a.  He be provided a United States Air Force Supervisory Exam  (USAFE)
study guide and after a period of 90  days  following  his  receipt  of  the
USAFE study guide, he be administered the USAFE.

      b.  The Senior Enlisted Performance  Reports  (EPRs),  AF  Forms  911,
rendered for the periods 7 Jul 97 through 6 Jul 98 and 7 Jul 98  through  19
Jan 99, be amended in Section IX, Time-in-Grade Eligible, to reflect “NO.”

      c.  The EPR, rendered for the period 20 Jan 99 through 30 Sep  99,  be
amended as follows:

            1.   In Section I, Block 3, Grade, to reflect “SMSgt.”

            2.   In Section V, Rater’s  Comments,  by  deleting  the  last
sentence, “Best of the best; my #1 MSgt in leadership, accomplishments and
work ethic; definitely promote to SMSgt,” and replacing with, “Best of the
best; my #1 SNCO  in  leadership/accomplishments/work  ethics;  definitely
promote to CMSgt!”

            3.   In Section VI, Rater’s Rater’s Comments,  by  deleting  the
last sentence, “#1 MSgt in my 19.5 years;  seasoned  leader  ready  for  ADL
Manager’s job; definitely promote to SMSgt!,” and replacing with,  “#1  SNCO
in my 19.5 years; seasoned leader ready for ADL  Manager’s  job;  definitely
promote to CMSgt!”

            4.   In  Section  VII,  Indorser’s  Comments,  by  deleting  the
sentence, “Absolutely superior Senior NCO and dental leader; one of  my  top
MSgts assigned to the 10  DS,”  and  replacing  with,  “Absolutely  superior
Senior NCO and dental leader; one of my top SNCOs assigned to  the  10  DS;”
deleting the sentence, “Currently  attending  the  Senior  NCO  Academy  in-
residence, class 99-F; as a master  sergeant;  a  terrific  accomplishment,”
and  replacing  with,  “Currently  attending  the  Senior  NCO  Academy  in-
residence, class 99-F; a terrific accomplishment;”  deleting  the  sentence,
“Completion of  the  SNCOA  will  certify  this  MSgt’s  already  known  and
established leadership qualities,” and replacing  with  “Completion  of  the
SNCOA will certify this SNCO’s  already  known  and  established  leadership
qualities;” and deleting the sentence, “Selected as 10 MDG, OL-C and  21  SW
Tenant  Unit  SNCO  of  the  Quarter;  definitely  promote  to  SMSgt,”  and
replacing with “Selected as 10 MDG, OL-C and 21 SW Tenant Unit SNCO  of  the
Quarter; definitely promote to CMSgt.”

            5.   In Section IX, Time-in-Grade Eligible, to reflect “NO.”.

      d.  The EPR rendered for the period 1 Oct 99  through  30 Sep  00,  be
amended in Section I, Block 3, Grade, to reflect “SMSgt.”

      e.  The EPR rendered for the period 1 Oct 00  through  30 Sep  01,  be
declared void and removed from his records.

It is  further  recommended  that  he  be  provided  supplemental  promotion
consideration to the grade of chief  master  sergeant  for  all  appropriate
cycles beginning with cycle 00E9, using the USAFE score.

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.

If  supplemental  promotion  consideration  results  in  the  selection  for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the  records
shall be corrected to show that applicant was promoted to the  higher  grade
on the date of rank established  by  the  supplemental  promotion  and  that
applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade  as
of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2005-
02650 in Executive Session on 2 Aug 06, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                  Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
              Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 14 Sep 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 2 Nov 05.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Nov 05.
   Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Response, dated 9 Dec 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair






AFBCMR BC-2005-02650




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 corrected to show that:

            a.   He be provided a United States Air Force Supervisory Exam
(USAFE) study guide and after a period of 90 days following his receipt of
the USAFE study guide, he be administered the USAFE.

            b.  The Senior Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs), AF Forms
911, rendered for the periods 7 July 1997 through 6 July 1998 and 7 July
1998 through 19 January 1999, be, and hereby are, amended in Section IX,
Time-in-Grade Eligible, to reflect “NO.”

            c.  The EPR, rendered for the period 20 January 1999 through 30
September 1999, be, and hereby is, amended as follows:

                 1.    In Section I, Block 3, Grade, to reflect “SMSgt.”

                 2.    In Section V, Rater’s Comments, by deleting the
last sentence, “Best of the best; my #1 MSgt in leadership,
accomplishments and work ethic; definitely promote to SMSgt,” and
replacing with, “Best of the best; my #1 SNCO in
leadership/accomplishments/work ethics; definitely promote to CMSgt!”

                 3.    In Section VI, Rater’s Rater’s Comments, by deleting
the last sentence, “#1 MSgt in my 19.5 years; seasoned leader ready for ADL
Manager’s job; definitely promote to SMSgt!,” and replacing with, “#1 SNCO
in my 19.5 years; seasoned leader ready for ADL Manager’s job; definitely
promote to CMSgt!”

                 4.    In Section VII, Indorser’s Comments, by deleting the
sentence, “Absolutely superior Senior NCO and dental leader; one of my top
MSgts assigned to the 10 DS,” and replacing with, “Absolutely superior
Senior NCO and dental leader; one of my top SNCOs assigned to the 10 DS;”
deleting the sentence, “Currently attending the Senior NCO Academy in-
residence, class 99-F; as a master sergeant; a terrific accomplishment,”
and replacing with, “Currently attending the Senior NCO Academy in-
residence, class 99-F; a terrific accomplishment;” deleting the sentence,
“Completion of the SNCOA will certify this MSgt’s already known and
established leadership qualities,” and replacing with “Completion of the
SNCOA will certify this SNCO’s already known and established leadership
qualities;” and deleting the sentence, “Selected as 10 MDG, OL-C and 21 SW
Tenant Unit SNCO of the Quarter; definitely promote to SMSgt,” and
replacing with “Selected as 10 MDG, OL-C and 21 SW Tenant Unit SNCO of the
Quarter; definitely promote to CMSgt.”

                 5.    In Section IX, Time-in-Grade Eligible, to reflect
“NO.”.

            d.   The EPR rendered for the period 1 October 1999 through 30
September 2000, be, and hereby is, amended in Section I, Block 3, Grade, to
reflect “SMSgt.”

            e.   The EPR rendered for the period 1 October 2000 through 30
September 2001, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his
records.

      It is further directed that he be provided supplemental promotion
consideration to the grade of chief master sergeant for all appropriate
cycles beginning with cycle 00E9, using the USAFE score.

      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.

      If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the records
shall be corrected to show that applicant was promoted to the higher grade
on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that
applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as
of that date.







                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency