RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01832
                                       INDEX CODE:  131.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                      COUNSEL: NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  18 December 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show he was  promoted  to  the  rank  of  senior
master sergeant (SMSgt) (E-8) retroactive to 1984 and he receive  retirement
in that grade.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unfairly treated and discriminated against which resulted in him  not
being considered for promotion to senior master sergeant.

In support of his application, he provides a personal statement and  a  copy
of his disapproval for extension of his overseas tour.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 9 August 1965, the applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  at  the
age of 18 for a period of four years in the  rank  of  airman  basic  (E-1).
The applicant was progressively promoted to  the  rank  of  master  sergeant
effective and with a date of rank of 1 November 1978.

On 23 November 1982,  the  applicant  received  Article  15  punishment  for
falsifying  inclusive  dates  for  leave.   His  punishment   consisted   of
reduction in grade to technical sergeant and  forfeiture  of  $50;  however,
the portion of punishment pertaining to  reduction  in  rank  was  suspended
until 22 May 1983, unless sooner vacated.

On 15 October 1984, he signed an AF Form  1160,  Application  for  Voluntary
Retirement, with an effective  date  of  1 September  1985.   The  applicant
retired effective 1 September 1985 in the grade of master sergeant.  He  had
served 20 years and 22 days on active duty.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted  from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the  letter  prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial of the  applicant’s  request.   DPPPWB  states
based on the applicant’s date of rank  to  master  sergeant  of  1  November
1978, he was considered for promotion beginning with  cycle  82S8.   He  was
nonselected for promotion for cycles 82S8 through 84S8 based  on  his  total
score being below the cutoff score required for promotion in his  Air  Force
Specialty Code (AFSC).  On 1 April 1984, the  applicant  was  nonrecommended
for promotion during cycle 85S8 based on a Letter  of  Reprimand  (LOR)  for
being disrespectful to a superior officer and displaying conduct  unbecoming
a senior non-commissioned officer (SNCO) and receipt of an  Article  15  for
falsifying inclusive dates for leave.  On 10 August 1984, the applicant  was
nonrecommended for promotion for cycle  86S8  based  on  an  LOR  for  being
removed from Air  Traffic  Watch  Supervisory  and  Control  duties  due  to
failure to comply with Air Force Communication Command  directives,  receipt
of an LOR for being disrespectful  to  a  superior  officer  and  displaying
conduct  unbecoming  a  SNCO,  receipt  of  an  Article  15  for  falsifying
inclusive dates for leave, and overall duty  performance  being  below  that
expected of a  SNCO.   The  applicant’s  commander  was  acting  within  his
authority when he nonrecommended the applicant for promotion.

The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant indicates he disagrees  with  AFPC/DPPPWB’s  evaluation  and
provides a point by  point  response  to  the  facts  presented  in  their
evaluation.  He refers the Board back to his initial letter  and  attached
evidence.  The applicant emphasizes that all of the actions taken  against
him were a means to get him “out of the gay Major’s sight.”  Consequently,
he was not able to test for promotion to E-8, received bad APRs,  and  was
not able to extend his tour during his last 11 months in  the  Air  Force.
He “knew too much.”  The applicant asks the Board to view  his  case  from
his perspective:


            a.  NCO versus Officer (A no win situation)


            b.  Black versus White (Racism works both ways)


            c.  Gay (Abnormal at that time in the military) versus Straight
(Normal).


The applicant also reemphasizes his view the Major had a  senior  NCO  who
would do anything to please the Major in hopes  of  getting  promoted  and
that the Major and the senior NCO  conspired  to  keep  him  from  getting
promoted.

The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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  probable  error  or  injustice.   We  note  the   applicant’s
assertions that he was unfairly  treated  and  discriminated  against  which
resulted in him not being considered for promotion to the  grade  of  SMSgt;
however, we find no evidence to support his contentions.   The  evidence  of
record indicates the applicant’s total  test  scores  for  promotion  cycles
82S8 and 84S8 were below the cutoff score for promotion in  his  AFSC.   His
commander, did not recommend the applicant for  promotion  to  SMSgt  during
promotion cycles 85S8 and 86S8 as  a  direct  result  from  the  applicant’s
misconduct and duty performance.  We find his  commander  acted  within  his
authority and there is  no  evidence  to  indicate  an  error  or  injustice
occurred.  In view of the foregoing and in the absence of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we agree with the assessment by the Air Force  office  of  primary
responsibility and find  no  basis  on  which  to  favorably  consider  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 this application in  Executive
Session on 20 September 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
            Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
            Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Jr., Member


The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2006-01832
was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Jun 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 28 Jun 06.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Jul 06.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, not dated, w/atchs.




                                  MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                                   Panel Chair