RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02931
            INDEX CODE: 131.00
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 31 MARCH 2008
_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for supplemental  promotion  to  the  grade  of  chief
master sergeant (CMSgt) for promotion cycle 05E9.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The board did not properly evaluate his records against his  peers.  He
believes gross errors were made by the board when scoring his  records.
He states his records may not warrant the highest board score; however,
he believes his records do not deserve the lowest board  score  either.
Applicant states he received the highest board score in his  Air  Force
Specialty when he competed for  senior  master  sergeant  in  the  02E8
promotion cycle; however, he received the lowest board  score  when  he
competed for CMSgt during the 05E9 promotion cycle.

In support  of  the  application,  he  submits  copies  of:  2005  Data
Verification Report, Senior Non-commissioned Officer (SNCO)  Evaluation
Brief,  Enlisted  Performance  Reports,  Decorations,  Weighted  Airman
Promotion  System  (WAPS)  Score  Notice,  a  letter  from  HQ/AFRC/LG,
Military  Personnel  Flight  Memorandum  05-28,  and  three   character
references.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the personnel data system  reflects  the  applicant
contracted his initial enlistment  in  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  23
October 1985.  He has been  progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
SMSgt, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1
March 2003.

Promotion selections for cycle 05E9 were  made  in  November  2005.  He
received a 277.50 board score and achieved a  48.88  on  his  Promotion
Fitness Exam and 203.66 on the other weighted factors. The  applicant’s
total promotion  score  was  530.04.  The  cutoff  score  required  for
selection in the applicant’s Air Force Specialty Code was 633.27.

The applicant competed  again  for  promotion  to  CMSgt  in  the  06E9
promotion cycle;  however,  he  was  not  selected  for  promotion  and
received a 352.50 board score.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

APFC/DPPPWB  recommends  denial.   DPPWB  states  the  competition  for
promotion to the top two grades is extremely  intense  since,  by  law,
only three percent of the total  enlisted  force  may  serve  in  these
grades.  Because of this restriction, many deserving individuals cannot
be promoted.  In addition, while actual scores may vary between  panels
the specific reason why certain panels score the way they did cannot be
determined since this is a subjective decision.   However,  since  each
Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) is reviewed  by  a  single  panel,  all
records within the same AFSC are evaluated  under  the  same  standard.
There are a number of factors affecting board scores such as new  panel
members with different  thought  processes,  previous  eligible's  with
changed and or improved records, and a large  pool  of  new  eligibles.
Based on the above, DPPPWB recommends the applicant’s request be denied
for supplemental consideration  for  cycle  05E9.   DPPPWB  states  his
record was evaluated fairly and equally using the same process as those
records the applicant was competing against.

The AFPC/DPPPWB complete 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  3
November 2006 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,
this office has received no response (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by  existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was time filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate
the  existence  of  an  error  or  injustice  warranting   supplemental
consideration for promotion to CMSgt. We took notice of the significant
changes in his board score; however, realizing it is not  uncommon  for
board scores to differ  from  year  to  year  without  any  significant
changes in the record, we agree with the opinion and recommendation  of
the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its  rationale
as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not  been  the
victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, absent persuasive evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling basis upon  which  to  recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has  not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel   will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore,
the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did   not
demonstrate  the  existence  of  material  error  or   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  Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02931 in Executive Session on 5 December 2006, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                 Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 September  2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  AFPC/DPPPWB Letter, dated 4 October 2006.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 November 2006.




                                   MICHAEL V. BARBINO
                                   Panel Chair

[pic]

                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                               WASHINGTON, DC








[pic]

Office of the Assistant Secretary

AFBCMR
1535 Command Drive EE Wing 3rd Floor
Andrews AFB, MD 20762-7002



XXXXXXX.

XXXXXXX


XXXXXXX


Dear XXXXXXX

      Reference your application, AFBCMR BC-2006-02931 submitted under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552, 10 USC).

      After careful consideration of your application and military
records, the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice.  Accordingly,
the Board denied your application.

      You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for
consideration by the Board.  In the absence of such additional evidence,
a further review of your application is not possible.

      BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR





                                                       GREGORY E. JOHNSON
                                                             Chief
Examiner
                                                 Air Force Board for
Correction
                                                       of Military
Records

2 Attachments:
Record of Board Proceedings
Information Bulletin