RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00899
INDEX CODE: 131.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 SEP 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His rank on his Certification of Military Service be changed from airman
third class (A3C) to airman first class (A1C).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes his record is in error.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a Certification of
Military Service.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant's military personnel records were destroyed by fire in 1973
at the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC) in St. Louis, Missouri.
Data extracted from his reconstructed records indicate the following:
According to the applicant’s Certification of Military Service, on 9
September 1957, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force and on
8 December 1958. He was honorably released from active duty in the grade
of A3C under the provisions of AFR 39-16. He served 1 year, 2 months, and
29 days on active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial. DPPPWB states to be promoted to A1C during
the timeframe in question, an airman must have served eight months time-in-
grade (TIG) as an A3C and 12 months TIG as an airman second class (A2C).
Since the applicant was on active duty for only 15 months, he would not
have had sufficient TIG to have been promoted to the rank of A1C.
The DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 12 May 2006, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. After reviewing the evidence of
record, we agree with the Air Force that since the applicant was on active
duty for only 15 months, he would not have had sufficient TIG to have been
promoted to A1C. Further, he has provided no evidence showing he was
promoted to A1C. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation
of the Air Force and adopt its rationale as basis for our conclusion that
he has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Based on the
available evidence of record, we find no compelling basis to recommend
granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an error or an injustice; the application was denied without a
personal appearance; and 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-2006-
00899 in Executive Session on 13 June 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-00899 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Reconstructed Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 27 Apr 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 06.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02586
However, based on the applicant’s date of rank (DOR) to A1C (16 Nov 74), he would not have had the sufficient TIG for promotion to SSgt until 16 Jul 75, five days after his discharge. 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 28 Sep 06 for review and comment within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00427
The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) denied applicant’s request for upgrade of discharge to honorable and change of reenlistment eligibility code on 16 October 1975 (Exhibit B). On 9 February 1978, the Air Force Discharge Review Board again considered all the evidence of record and concluded that the applicant should receive an honorable discharge. He was successfully treated for this alcoholism while hospitalized at the Kingsbridge VA Hospital in Bronx, New York from 8 August 1976...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00249
He would like his performance reports his total active service and experience be considered and he be granted a waiver to test for the 2006E7 promotion cycle. DPPPWB states that all members must “bide their time” to mature, gain knowledge, attend PME, and develop leadership skills in each rank before advancing to the next rank. However, the evidence provided does not persuade us that granting the applicant a waiver to test for the 06E7 promotion cycle is appropriate.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01271
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. Applicant’s record reflects he received an Article 15 vacation of suspended reduction to airman on 18 Nov 69. Based on this, his date of rank (DOR) to airman should have been 15 Jul 69 (date original Article 15 was imposed) with an effective date of 18 Nov 69 (date of vacation of suspended reduction).
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01115
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01115 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 13 OCTOBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) Code, Narrative Reason and Separation Code be changed so he may join the Air National Guard. On 7 February 1997, the discharge authority directed that...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2005-00158
However, on 16 May 05, HQ AFPC/DPPAE advised the applicant that his 2H RE code was erroneous and had been administratively changed to 4E (grade is airman, airman basic, or A1C and the member has completed more than 31 months of service) - See Exhibit C. [Note: The 4E RE code is a waiverable code; i.e., if a member has an in-demand skill and is otherwise eligible, the Reserves may waive the immediate reenlistment impediment and accept him.] ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00075
If the applicant had not been court-martialed and reduced to the grade of AB, he would have been promoted to the grade of SRA on 16 Feb 04, provided there were no ineligibility conditions and he had the recommendation of his commander. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB notes the applicant’s incorrect promotion to airman and A1C and provides details regarding the applicant’s promotion eligibility and the pertinent DORs based on various circumstances. A...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02493
Since the applicant was in confinement until 7 May 2003, he was not eligible for promotion to airman until 8 May 2003 (6 months’ TIG) and was eligible for promotion to A1C on 8 March 2004 (10 months’ TIG). We note that in his current grade of airman first class, he reaches his Expiration Term of Service on 8 December 2004 and must separate. Therefore, after weighing the evidence presented, we believe a more equitable remedy would be to provide the applicant the opportunity to reenlist with...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-3806
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36- 2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the PECD, and the date of the Décor 6 must be before the date of the selections for the cycle in question. The applicant provides no documentation (such as e-mail traffic or letters from his chain of command) to prove that he aggressively pursued the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01667
They also find no promotion order indicating he was ever selected for promotion prior to retirement AFPC/DPPPWB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 5 August 2005 for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...