Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03659
Original file (BC-2006-03659.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03659
            INDEX CODE:  128.05
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  1 JUN 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show he was retired in the grade of master
sergeant (E-7) and he be paid all back pay and eligible allowances.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Erroneous  documentation  filed  in  his  military  personnel  records
prevented him from receiving fair promotion opportunities  and  forced
him to retire early.

In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provided  a   personal
statement, and excerpts from his military personnel records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s records reflect he enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force
on 1 September 1955, for a period of four years.  He was progressively
promoted to the grade of technical sergeant and retired in that  grade
on 1 September 1975.  He served  a  total  of  20  years  active  duty
service.  On 22 September  2006,  his  records  were  administratively
corrected to reflect award of the Air Medal w/1 OLC, the AFCM (Basic),
the Vietnam Service Medal, and the NCO Professional Military Education
Ribbon.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DPPPWB recommends  denial.   DPPPWB  states  the  applicant’s  request
should be time barred.  Should the Board choose to  decide  the  case,
recommend  his  request  be  denied  based   on   lack   of   official
documentation/promotion history files.  The application was not  filed
within the three-year time limitation  imposed  by  AFI  36-2303,  Air
Force Board for Correction of  Military  Records,  (AFBCMR)  paragraph
3.5.  In addition to being untimely under the statute of  limitations,
the applicant’s request may also  be  dismissed  under  the  equitable
doctrine of laches, which denies relief to one  who  has  unreasonably
delayed  asserting  a  claim.   Laches  consist   of   two   elements;
inexcusable delay and prejudice to the Air Force resulting there from.
 According to DPPPWB the applicant waited more than three years  after
discharge to petition the AFBCMR.  He states he  was  unaware  of  the
errors until he received  his  records  from  the  National  Personnel
Records Center in 2005.

DPPPWB states it appears the erroneous  absent  without  leave  (AWOL)
documentation did not affect his  promotions.   DPPPWB  is  unable  to
determine what affect the added decorations  would  have  had  on  the
applicant’s promotion as promotion history files are  only  maintained
for a period of 10 years as outlined in AFR 4-20,  Table  35-12,  Rule
29, “Records Disposition Schedule”.  There is no documentation in  the
applicant’s record indicating he was ever  promoted  to  or  held  the
grade of master sergeant.

The DPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states the errors in his military personnel records  are
proof of unfair and unjust treatment in the promotion  system  due  to
poor record keeping by the civilian base personnel  office  from  1955
through 1975.  He requested correction of  his  records  within  three
years  after  discovering  the  error  and  therefore  should  not  be
dismissed based on the three-year  time  limitation.   If  decorations
were not posted in records during the Vietnam Era,  individuals  would
not be promoted due to lost of  points  and  lack  of  recognition  of
accomplishments.  In regard to the statement from the advisory stating
there is no documentation  is  his  records  indicating  he  was  ever
promoted to or held the grade of master sergeant, he provided  a  copy
of a medical consult reflecting the grade of master sergeant.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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 error or injustice.  We believe there may  have  been
mitigating circumstances based on erroneous documentation filed in his
records,  however;  we  also  believe  the   applicant   had   several
opportunities to recognize and correct the errors in his records prior
to promotion consideration as well as prior  to  his  retirement  from
service, and he failed to use due diligence  to  correct  the  errors.
The Board notes it is not possible to determine what affect,  if  any,
the missing decorations, or  the  erroneous  documents  filed  in  the
applicant’s personnel record, impacted his promotion opportunities  as
promotion history files are only maintained for a period of  10 years.
There also is no official documentation in  the  applicant’s  records;
i.e., promotion order to indicate he was ever promoted to, or held the
grade of master sergeant.  We also note the applicant’s  records  will
be administratively corrected to reflect award of the AFCM w/1 OLC and
his service number corrected to reflect 14586283.  In the  absence  of
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find  no  basis  to  recommend
granting the relief sought in 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 Docket  Number  BC-2006-
03659 in Executive Session on 3 May 2007, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Maureen B. Higgins, Member
                 Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Nov 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 23 Jan 07.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Feb 07.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Mar 07, w/atchs.





                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00316

    Original file (BC-2006-00316.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In order for a decoration to be eligible to be considered in a promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date and the Recommendation for Decoration Printout must be before the date of selection for the cycle. From the evidence of record, the applicant’s decoration does not meet the criteria to be considered for promotion consideration for cycle 05E7. The letter from the applicant’s commander is duly noted; however, we do not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03866

    Original file (BC-2006-03866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant believes his Impaired Hearing and Tinnitus were caused by the noise exposure he experienced while performing duties as a senior woodworker. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence that he was awarded the AFCM 3OLC. Nor do we find evidence showing that his records should be corrected to show he was promoted to any grade higher than that currently reflected.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0102559

    Original file (0102559.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence the decoration was submitted before the date of selections for cycle 00E7. The AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPRRP states, in part, that if the Board determines the applicant should be promoted to the grade of master sergeant effective 1 October 2000, they will correct his records to reflect that he held the grade of master sergeant on his last day of active duty and was retired in the grade of master sergeant effective 1 January 2001....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00919

    Original file (BC-2005-00919.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on the addition of the Air Force Commendation Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster (AFCM, 1 OLC), and the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), he would have been selected for promotion to the grade of master sergeant prior to his retirement since he missed promotion by 1 point or so. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. However, based upon the presumption of regularity in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9901669

    Original file (9901669.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the last promotion cycle the applicant was eligible for consideration to the grade of technical sergeant prior to his retirement date was 93A6 with promotions effective 1 Aug 92 – 1 Jul 93. Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2), the directive in effect at the time,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01455

    Original file (BC-2007-01455.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01455 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 11 OCTOBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The following corrections be made to his DD 214: 1) His rank be corrected to Sergeant (E-4); 2) He be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal, the Combat Readiness Medal (CRM), the Utah Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-03866

    Original file (BC-2006-03866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In his previous request, he raised the issue of proficiency pay stating the Board did not address it. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit L. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate that the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice warranting further correction to his record. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01507

    Original file (BC-2007-01507.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant provided a statement in his own behalf. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the active duty Air Force on 14 Jul 52 and was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt). The application has not been filed within the three-year time limitation imposed by AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, paragraph 3-5.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01397

    Original file (BC-2007-01397.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served 23 years of continuous active duty service during which time he received only one senior noncommissioned officer promotion (SNCO) to master sergeant (MSgt). 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01576

    Original file (BC-2002-01576.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be upgraded to a Airman’s Medal (AmnM) for action performed on 13 November 1982. b. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 1 October 1984, he was awarded an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for Heroism for his actions on 13 November 1982. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...