RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00862
            INDEX CODE:  131.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  23 SEP 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

As an Independent Duty  Medical  Technician  (IDMT),  he  be  afforded
supplemental promotion consideration for promotion cycle 2005E7 (05E7)
in the Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 4N0X1, rather  than  4N0X1C,
and his promotion status be changed from non-select to select  to  the
grade of master sergeant (MSgt).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been considered for promotion to E7 for promotion cycle
05E7 based on the findings of the Secretary of the Air Force Inspector
General (SAF/IG).  SAF/IG in a letter dated  24 February  2006  stated
that all 4N0X1s and 4N0X1Cs should have been considered for  promotion
based on the duty AFSC not the Primary AFSC because  all  4N0X1Cs  are
dual qualified and should be testing according to the duty  AFSC.   He
is in a slick 4N0X1 duty position but was considered for promotion  as
a 4N0X1C.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

EXAMINER’S NOTE:  The  letter  the  applicant  submitted  from  SAF/IG
dismisses his complaint.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The  following  information  was  extracted   from   the   applicant’s
submission (Exhibit A) and the Air Force evaluations  (Exhibits B,  E,
and F):

A “slick” AFSC indicates the basic  classification;  an  AFSC  with  a
suffix indicates a “shred” or specialized category.

Members are considered for promotion based on their Control Air  Force
Specialty Code (CAFSC) as of the  Promotion  Eligibility  Cutoff  Date
(PECD).  He was properly tested and  considered  for  promotion  CAFSC
4N0X1C during cycle 05E7.

In this case, individuals who were qualified as IDMTs originally  were
included in the existing basic or “slick”  AFSC  of  4N0X1  (Aerospace
Medical  Service).   The  differences  between  the   two   technician
categories are training  and  experience.   All  IDMTs  are  qualified
medical technicians and are dual-qualified for either the 4N0X1 or the
4N0X1C CAFSC.  However, IDMTs are further specialized and  trained  to
be able to serve in remote, isolated and/or undesirable duty locations
as members of mobile medical units where it would not be practical  or
cost-effective to have a medical doctor on site.

On 13 May 2004, HQ AFPC approved reclassifying IDMTs  serving  in  the
4N0X1 “slick” CAFSC as a separate and distinct shred classification of
4N0X1C, to be effective 31 October 2004.  Because of the critical need
for  IDMTs,  the  Air  Force  wanted  to  identify  all   IDMT-skilled
individuals so they could be matched with  positions  requiring  their
special skills.  Not all IDMT personnel occupied  positions  requiring
IDMT skills.  Consequently, positions that required IDMT  skills  also
needed to be identified.  This identification and  conversion  process
required the base medical treatment facilities, the 82 MPFs,  and  the
manpower and assignment functional organizations to work  together  to
identify which members were qualified IDMTs and  then  determine  what
positions would be converted.  It was also incumbent on the member  to
acknowledge and verify AFSC award  actions.   HQ AFPC/DPPAC  initially
expected to identify and convert approximately 670 IDMT positions  and
identify approximately 495 qualified IDMT personnel.  By all accounts,
the conversion process did not go smoothly.

The 4N0X1C shred was effective on 31 October 2004.  The  4N071  Skills
and Knowledge Test (SKT) would be applicable to all  4N0X1  personnel,
to include the C shred.

On 3 November 2004, prior to the promotion cycle for  SSgts  to  MSgt,
CFMs were advised that, contrary to what  the  career  leadership  had
briefed, IDMTs assigned to  a  4N0X1C  CAFSC  position  would  compete
separately against themselves rather than with the larger 4N0X1 group.
 A subpopulation waiver was not requested in this case by  the  4N0X1C
CFM.

Testing for the 4N0X1/4N0X1C 05E6 and 05E7 promotion cycles took place
during the period 15 February-31 March 2005.  If the  AFSCs  had  been
combined, the cutoff score would have been different and the order  of
merit would not have contained the same names above the select line.

As of 10 December 2005, 578 IDMT 4N0X1C  positions,  rather  than  the
expected 670, had been identified.  Not  every  IDMT-qualified  member
was identified, mostly because they were  not  in  an  IDMT  position.
Some may not have been forthcoming about their IDMT skills  given  the
possible  assignment  to  remote  sites.   Even  if  all  IDMTs   were
identified during the conversion  process,  a  significant  percentage
would  not  be  in  places/positions  that  would  allow  them  to  be
immediately used as IDMTs.  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.

The applicant is currently serving in the grade of technical sergeant.
 He was considered, but not selected, for promotion to  the  grade  of
master sergeant in AFSC 4N0X1C during cycle 05E7 (promotions effective
August 2005 - July 2006).  His total  score  was  331.53.   The  score
required for selection in AFSC 4N0X1C was 339.95; the  score  required
for selection in AFSC 4N0X1 was 330.91.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB notes that CFMs were  advised  that  suffix  AFSCs  are
considered  separate  skills  for  promotion  testing.    Further,   a
subpopulation waiver cannot be submitted for convenience  or  to  gain
more promotions by increasing the eligible pool size.   The  promotion
AFSC and how eligibles are considered for promotion is independent  of
which SKT personnel are administered.  There are instances where  test
requirements of AFSC “families”  are  the  same,  as  with  the  4N0s.
Consequently,  the  applicant  took  the  correct   tests.    It   was
unfortunate the CFM provided inaccurate information to the members  in
these AFSCs.  However, to  maintain  the  fairness  and  integrity  of
Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS),  DPPPWB  contends  they  must
follow  the  same  policy  for  each  AFSC.    Denial   is   therefore
recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation, dated 22 March 2006,
was forwarded to the applicant on 31 March 2006 for review and comment
within 30 days.   As  of  this  date,  this  office  has  received  no
response.

On 4 May 2006, the Board  staff  forwarded  the  applicant  copies  of
memorandums  from  HQ  AFPC/DPPAC,  and  HQ  AFPC/JA  which  will   be
considered in the processing of his application (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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  A  review  of  this  application
before our  consideration  today  found  that  the  Aerospace  Medical
Service CFM, the 4N0X1 Function Manager, and  the  4N0X1/B/C  CFM  had
essentially briefed the field that for the CY05 promotion cycle  IDMTs
would test and compete for promotion  with  the  rest  of  the  career
field, but would be  competing  only  against  other  IDMTs  in  CY06.
Further, the 4N0X1/B/C CFM did not submit a subpopulation  waiver  for
the 4N0X1 AFSC because of this misconception.  During this  conversion
process, the Air Force expected to identify  670  IDMT  positions  and
approximately  495  qualified   IDMT   personnel.    The   Air   Force
acknowledged  that  this  particular  conversion  was  more  difficult
because IDMT manning was extremely low  and  not  all  qualified  IDMT
personnel were in locations that had IDMT positions.  Further, several
qualified IDMTs--not in IDMT positions--apparently were  reluctant  to
acknowledge their qualifications because of future assignment in the C
shred to an undesirable duty location.  Also admitted was that, during
the conversion process, not every qualified IDMT  was  identified  and
that most, but not all, that were not identified were not assigned  to
an  IDMT  position.   The  primary  problems  seemed  to   have   been
identifying the IDMT positions early enough in the process to allow  a
certain amount of shifting of resources to local IDMT positions  where
and when possible, and not having enough qualified IDMTs to  fill  the
requirements.  Accounts appear to indicate  this  indirect  conversion
was not a smooth process.  By March 2005, less than 50% of the  career
field’s IDMTs had been converted to  the  4N0X1C  CAFSC.   All  things
considered, the process for the most part seems  to  have  been  in  a
state of flux when those members who had been  identified  as  4N0X1Cs
were considered in a separate group.  In  our  view,  a  more  prudent
decision may have been either to have the relevant individuals compete
in one large group for the 05E7  promotion  cycle  or  delay  separate
competition until CY06, as was briefed to the career  field.   We  did
not  reach  this  conclusion  lightly.   We   fully   considered   the
contentions made by AFPC/DPPPWB, AFPC/DPPAC,  and  AFPC/JA.   We  also
understand that the 4N0X1s and the 4N0X1Cs took the same SKT, and that
sometimes  there  is  a  human  tendency  perhaps  not  to  apply   as
significant an effort when one is competing in a larger  group,  where
the odds of a lower cutoff score may  be  better,  than  if  one  were
competing in a smaller group.  However, the Air Force has  a  critical
need for IDMTs and already suffers from a significant  shortage.   The
comments of these  applicants,  and  those  on  the  IDMT  Association
“blog,”  reflect  a   significant   amount   of   demoralization   and
dissatisfaction  with  the   identification/conversion   process   and
separate competition during the CY05 cycle.   These  members  question
the credibility of their career leadership and  the  fairness  of  the
conversion process with respect  to  its  impact  on  their  promotion
opportunities.   We  are  concerned  the  IDMT   shortage   could   be
exacerbated if these individuals begin to wonder whether  they  should
remain in the Air Force, or if members who  are  being  recruited  for
this career field also opt out.  While  there  may  not  have  been  a
“legal  error”  in  the  identification,  conversion,   testing,   and
consideration processes, we believe it is  important,  given  the  Air
Force’s vital need for  these  specialized  individuals,  to  avoid  a
career-wide perception of  unfairness  with  the  promotion  cycle  in
question.  That the career leadership disseminated  wrong  information
in their briefings is indisputable, and the  conversion  process  does
not seem to have progressed to the  point  that  separate  competitive
groups were warranted for the  CY05  promotion  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
05E7 promotion cycle.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of  the  Air  Force
relating to the APPLICANT be provided supplemental consideration for
promotion to the grade of master sergeant for the Control Air  Force
Specialty Code 4N0X1 for the 05E7 promotion cycle.

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.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 13 June 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Member
                 Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2006-00862 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Feb 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 22 Mar 06.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Mar 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 May 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAC, dated 3 Jan 06.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, HQ AFPC/JA, dated 27 Jan 06.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair





AFBCMR BC-2006-00862




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      , be provided supplemental consideration for
promotion to the grade of master sergeant for the Control Air Force
Specialty Code 4N0X1 for the 05E7 promotion cycle.

      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.




                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                       Director
                       Air Force Review Boards Agency