Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | bc-2006-02658
Original file (bc-2006-02658.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02658
            INDEX CODE:  107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show that he was  not  nonrecommended  for
promotion  and  was  promoted  to  the  grade  of  technical  sergeant
effective and with a date of rank of 1 March 2006.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His promotion nonrecomendation was based on a false accusation, before
he was afforded his constitutional right to trial and the charges were
subsequently dismissed with prejudice.

In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of Notice of Entry
of Judgment and/or Order  and  Plea/Judgment,  Request  for  Promotion
Reinstatement Memorandum, a copy of a Nonrecommendation for  Promotion
Memorandum, a copy of  Response  to  Letter  of  Reprimand  (LOR)  and
Unfavorable Information  Action  Memorandum,  and  excerpts  from  his
military personnel records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 August 1995,  for
a term of four  years  as  an  airman  basic.   He  was  progressively
promoted to the grade  of  staff  sergeant.   He  was  considered  and
tentatively selected for promotion to the grade of technical  sergeant
during promotion cycle 05E6.  He would have been promoted  on  1 March
2006.  On 23 January  2006,  his  commander  non-recommended  him  for
promotion based on his failure to obey, that resulted  in  his  arrest
for operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPWB recommends denial.  DPPPWB states in part,  the  fact  that
his case was dismissed does not mean he was innocent of  the  offense.
Based on a conversation between AFPC/JA and the legal office at Hickam
AFB, the case was dismissed, because the arresting officer  failed  to
appear in court.  His commander issued the LOR and nonrecommended  him
for promotion because he failed to obey a direct order and was driving
under the influence, with a blood alcohol level of .199%, not based on
whether or not he was found guilty of  the  offense  or  convicted  by
trial.  Commanders have the  authority  to  nonrecommend  members  for
promotion, who they feel are  not  ready  to  assume  the  duties  and
responsibilities of the next higher rank.

The DPPPWB evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
9 Nov 06, for review and comment 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 timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  After a thorough review  of  the
applicant’s submission and the available evidence of  record,  we  are
not persuaded that the relief requested should be  granted.   We  took
notice of the complete submission in judging the merits of  the  case;
however, 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 former member has not been the  victim  of
an error or injustice.  Therefore, we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
warrant  favorable  consideration  of  the  relief  sought   in   this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of a 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 no considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02658 in Executive Session on 12 December 2006, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. John B. Hennessey, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
                 Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jul 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 2 Nov 06.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Nov 06.






      JOHN B. HENNESSEY
      Panel Chair




Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0202396

    Original file (0202396.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 27 Jun 01, the applicant received a LOR for driving under the influence (DUI) as well as a letter from his commander nonrecommending him for promotion to E- 5 for cycle 00E5. Dismissal of the charges against the applicant involved neither the presentation of any evidence nor any factual findings as to the merits of those charges. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01832

    Original file (BC-2006-01832.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was progressively promoted to the rank of master sergeant effective and with a date of rank of 1 November 1978. 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. His commander, did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800251

    Original file (9800251.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00251 INDEX CODES: 131.00, 111.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect the effective date for his promotion to the grade of master sergeant as 1 Apr 96, rather than 1 Nov 97, with back and allowances. DPPPWB believes the applicant needs to provide a copy of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02142

    Original file (BC-2006-02142.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02142 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 Jan 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His promotion to staff sergeant be reinstated effective 1 Jan 06. In a letter dated 14 Jun 06, the applicant appealed his nonrecommendation for promotion to his squadron and group...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01265

    Original file (BC-2006-01265.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His administrative demotion and all documents relating to his demotion be removed from his records. The AFPC/JA complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 2 June 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 26 May 06.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02477

    Original file (BC-2006-02477.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his request, applicant provided a Sworn Statement from the Noncommissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC) Employments, Email Traffic Relating to Retraining, Phase II NCO Retraining Program Memorandum, Email Traffic from Air Force Contact Center, a copy of a X- Factor Letter, a Memorandum for Record from Applicant, Email traffic from NCOIC Employment and three Letters of Support from his Commanders. The DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03563

    Original file (BC-2004-03563.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPWB recommended denial noting the applicant was administratively demoted from TSgt to SrA with a DOR of 15 Jul 03. His commander also served him with a letter of reprimand (LOR), established an unfavorable information file (UIF), and his name was placed on a control roster for this conviction. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03259

    Original file (BC-2005-03259.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Title 10 USC, Section 1407(f)(2)(B), states if an enlisted member was at any time reduced in grade as the result of a court-martial sentence, nonjudicial punishment, or an administrative action, unless the member was subsequently promoted to a higher enlisted grade, the computation of retired pay is determined under Title 10 USC, Section 1406, Retired pay base for members who first became members before September 1980: final basic pay. The applicant further contends the demotion was invalid...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00981

    Original file (BC-2006-00981.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The HQ AFPC/DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/JA recommended denial, stating in part, the applicant asserts numerous errors associated with the promotion propriety action that rendered him ineligible for promotion to MSgt and the nonjudicial punishment he received for forgery and making a false official statement. The applicant was selected for promotion to MSgt during cycle 04E7 and would have advanced to that grade on 1 Jan 05 if his commander had not withheld the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2003-00161

    Original file (BC-2003-00161.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Records provided by the applicant reflect that he filed an Inspector General (IG) complaint alleging he was the victim of unfair treatment by his squadron commander in the form of disproportionate punishment by receiving an LOR; denial of promotion to master sergeant; and a referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for mismanagement of the Nutritional Medicine Section. The applicant was notified of his commander’s recommendation and that a general discharge was being recommended. On 3...