RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03307
            INDEX CODE:  133.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His demotion from E-5 to E-4 be removed and he be permitted to  retire
in the grade of E-6, if not E-7.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Prior to the October Unit Training Assembly (UTA) he called to  inform
his section leader that he would not make the October  UTA  due  to  a
business trip he had scheduled with his civilian employer.  He planned
on making up the UTA period at a later date.  Upon returning home,  he
learned he had received a letter from his unit notifying him he was in
violation of attendance rules.  The letter asked that he call  and  he
did so numerous times, but received no answer.  The letter he received
included a number for the unit Judge Advocate  General  (JAG)  but  he
found it was disconnected.  He attended the next month’s UTA  and  was
told his commander had changed the rules and he would not be  able  to
make up the UTA he missed.  The local JAG informed him they  would  be
representing the unit but  recommended  he  call  the  State  JAG  for
assistance.  He did so and  ended  up  receiving  the  run-around  for
several months.  When a representative was finally assigned to him, he
found himself abruptly deployed to the Middle East.  He gave up on the
military legal system and hired civilian counsel.  He contends he  had
a good record with  the  Missouri  Air  National  Guard  (MOANG),  was
scheduled to attend Non-Commissioned Officer (NCO) training,  and  was
to be promoted to E-6 upon completion of the course.  He  stayed  with
the MOANG for two more years and finally retired planning on  fighting
this battle at a later date.  Over his final two  years,  he  was  not
told how to protest his demotion.  He notes on his demotion order that
the reason for demotion is left blank.

In support of his  appeal,  the  applicant  has  provided  a  personal
statement, his demotion order and associated paperwork,  NCO  training
forms, a Report on Individual Personnel (RIP), his 20-year letter  and
associated retirement paperwork as well as an email trail.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted with the Air National Guard  (ANG)  on  10 December
1970.  He served until late  December  1975  and  was  transferred  to
civilian status on 11 December 1976.  He returned to duty with the ANG
on 20 November 1984 and was progressively promoted  to  the  grade  of
staff sergeant with a date of rank (DOR) of 1  October  1994.   On  23
January 1998, he was demoted to the grade of senior airman,  effective
and with a DOR of 23 January 1998.  He remained in the grade of senior
airmen for the remainder of his career.  He  was  transferred  to  the
Retired Reserve effective 26 February 2000  after  having  served  for
21 years, 3 months, and 7 days.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1P0F, after consultations with the State, has found that no proof
can be provided to show the applicant was properly notified  or  given
proper legal counsel regarding  demotion  action  taken  against  him.
While the commander may have been justified in  the  demotion  action,
members are afforded certain protection and advice under  ANG  policy.
Therefore, the State and A1P0F recommend the demotion  action  against
him be revoked and that he be returned to the grade of staff  sergeant
effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 1994.  A1P0F  does  not
however, support the applicant’s request that he be allowed to  retire
in the grade of E-6 or E-7.  Promotion eligibility is  subjective  and
is based on a number of factors  including  but  not  limited  to  the
member’s duty performance.  While it is evident this demotion affected
his eligibility for future promotions, it cannot be identified as  the
sole impediment to future progression Therefore, A1P0F recommends  his
request to be retired in the grade of E-6 or E-7 be denied.

A1P0F’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

While the applicant appreciates  the  ANG’s  recommendation  that  his
former grade be reinstated, he provides evidence he was  within  weeks
or months of being promoted to the grade of technical  sergeant  (E-6)
prior to his demotion.  He feels  he  could  have  progressed  further
within the ranks of the MOANG based on skills and merits  if  not  for
the lack of access to legal assistance.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________




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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of an error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case and are  of  the
opinion partial relief is warranted.  While we believe his DOR to  the
grade of staff sergeant should be changed to reflect 1  October  1994,
we are of the opinion his request for promotion to technical or master
sergeant should be denied.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions  and
recommendations of the Air National  Guard  (ANG)  office  of  primary
responsibility and adopt its rational as the basis for  our  decision;
and  we  recommend  that  the  applicant’s  records  be  corrected  as
indicated below.

______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was promoted to the
grade of staff sergeant, Air Force Reserve, effective and with a  date
of rank of 1 October 1994.

______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-03307 in Executive Session on 10 April 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Oct 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1P0F, dated 21 Feb 07.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Mar 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Mar 07, w/atchs.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair



                         DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
                                WASHINGTON DC


[pic]
Office Of The Assistant Secretary



AFBCMR BC-2006-03307




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 APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was promoted
to the grade of staff sergeant, Air Force Reserve, effective and with
a date of rank of 1 October 1994.





     JOE G. LINEBERGER

     Director

     Air Force Review Boards Agency