RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03729
INDEX CODE:
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be granted a direct promotion to the grade of master sergeant with
a date of rank (DOR) of 1 October 2004.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Not only was he unfairly tested for promotion, a subsequent
investigation revealed testing had been inappropriate.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a copy of a
letter from the Lajes Field, Inspector General (IG).
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant enlisted the Regular Air Force on 19 October 1984. He has
been progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant with a
DOR of 1 December 2000. He tested for cycle 04E7 on 16 March 2004 and
was rendered a nonselect for promotion to the grade of master
sergeant. He had scored a 64.89 on his PFE test and a 52.57 on his
SKT test. His total score was 328.96. The required score for
promotion on that cycle for his Air Force Specialty (AFS) was 335.70.
He recently reenlisted and is scheduled to continue serving until 24
November 2008. He has served over 20 years of Regular active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial. DPPPWB states while the IG letter
from Lajes Field, Azores does indicate the applicant’s complaint
merited investigation the IG referred the complaint to the local
Military Personnel Flight (MPF) for further investigation. DPPPWB
states the applicant is not specific as to why he thinks he was
unfairly tested. The SAF/MRBR contacted SAF/IGQ to inquire if they
had any information concerning the investigation and was told while
the IGQ database had no record of any such case, had there been one it
would have been destroyed at the end of fiscal year 2005. DPPPWB
states current Air Force policy does not allow for automatic
promotions. He has provided no documents to support his contention
and DPPPWB’s research has not revealed anything inappropriate
concerning his testing during said cycle.
DPPPWB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
12 January 2007 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. We took notice of the
applicant's 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 applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. Should the applicant provide corroborating
evidence such as the IG report from Lajes Field, we would be willing
to reconsider his request. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to
the contrary, we find no compelling 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-03729 in Executive Session on 16 February 2007, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Mr. Patrick C. Daugherty, Member
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 15 Dec 06.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Jan 07.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2003-02219
Applicant’s military personnel records reveal that, on 8 March 1997, the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve under the provisions of AFI 36-3208 (completion of active required service). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: HQ AFPC/DPPAOR states the applicant’s service dates and date of rank to the grade of E-4 are correct. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F).
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02215
Her promotion test to staff sergeant (SSgt) for cycle 88A5 be scored and credited for promotion. DPPPWB finds no error or injustice occurred when the applicant was required to retest after it was discovered that she took the wrong test. ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00405
In accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.1, Rule 2, dated 6 August 2002, a member must possess a PAFSC at the 5-skill level by the respective Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) for the cycle. They have no way of knowing whether the applicant’s commander would have approved a skill level waiver for cycle 02E5, especially since he had only been on active duty 52 days as of the PECD. He did not possess the skill level required, nor did he receive a skill...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02286 COUNSEL: MAJ THOMAS L. FARMER HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive a direct promotion to master sergeant with an effective date of promotion and a date of rank as a promotee in the SDI 8J000, Correctional Custody career field for 1998 or 1999. The applicant believes that two of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02847
According to emails provided by the applicant (Exhibit A), on 20 Mar 02 his squadron section requested a test date for him as he had not been identified on the promotion eligibility roster. A test date was obtained for him and, although he did not test in the regular window, his test score was considered for that testing cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00134 INDEX CODE: 112.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His enlistment grade be changed from senior airman (E-4) to his previous grade of staff sergeant (E-5), with a date of rank of 1 Sep 95. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was miscounseled on his enlistment options for the Regular Air Force and as a result, he lost a stripe and active duty time. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01560
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01560 INDEX CODE: 131.00 XXXXXXX R. COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 NOV 07 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for supplemental promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for cycle 05E6. It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03737
However, on, or about, 5 Jan 05, the applicant’s commander nonrecommended him for promotion based on his failure to pass the fitness test based on scoring in the marginal category and his involvement in an alcohol related incident at a civic event while attending ALS. That his squadron commander improperly nonrecommended him for promotion on 5 Jan 05 in violation of AFI 36-2502 (Substantiated). The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03331
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03331 INDEX CODE: 111.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 June 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt) for promotion cycles 03E8 and 04E8. DPPPWB...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 0002067 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive supplemental promotion consideration to master sergeant for cycle 95E7, using the test scores from cycle 97E7 vice 96E7. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...