Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03923
Original file (BC-2006-03923.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03923
            INDEX CODE:  131.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt) and then
chief master sergeant (CMSgt), both backdated appropriately.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 15 December 1997, he was  denied  promotion  to  SMSgt  due  to  an
injustice by his commander and the HQ Air National  Guard  ANG).   His
application will show he was removed from a SMSgt  position  with  the
ANG through a series of events  to  include  an  Enlisted  Performance
Report (EPR) ordered expunged by the AFBCMR in 2001.  For over 4 years
he could not be promoted to the grade of SMSgt by any military service
with a ‘2’ EPR in his records along with a denial of reenlistment.  He
states the Inspector General (IG)  supports  him  in  his  effort  and
insists he apply to the  AFBCMR  for  the  appropriate  relief.   This
injustice not only stopped him from being promoted above the grade  of
MSgt, it also destroyed his ability to become a commissioned  officer.


In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies  extracted
from his previous AFBCMR package, correspondence between applicant and
his Congressional representative, and documentation extracted from his
personnel records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant began his military service on 15 March 1982.   He  has  been
progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant (MSgt)  with  a
date of rank (DOR) of 15 December 1995.  He  entered  Extended  Active
Duty with the ANG HQ Statutory Tour program on 19 December  1994.   He
was extended and/or reenlisted five times over the ensuing  10  years.
He is currently serving  with  the  ANG  and  has  over  24  years  of
satisfactory service for pay and almost 19 years  of  active  military
service towards a retirement for  length  of  service.   His  date  of
separation (DOS) is currently 30 June 2008.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1P0F recommends denial.  A1P0F’s research revealed the  applicant
was afforded the opportunity  to  apply  for  seven  military  vacancy
announcements  showing  that  at  no  time  was  he  disqualified  for
application for  ANG  statutory  tour  positions  based  on  incorrect
reenlistment code/promotion eligibility code reflected in the military
personnel data system (MilPDS).  A1P0F notes the  applicant’s  earlier
request to have a ‘2’ EPR removed from  his  record  and  states  this
action was accomplished.  Further, EPR’s are  not  a  requirement  for
promotion.  If he was selected for a SMSgt position and submitted  for
subsequent promotion, his EPR  would  not  have  been  considered  and
therefore would not have exempted him from promotion.

A1P0F’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 3
July 2007 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
evidence of record and applicant's submission, we  are  not  persuaded
that his uncorroborated assertion  he  was  denied  promotion  by  the
unjust action of a superior officer, in and of itself,  is  sufficient
to  override  the  rationale  provided  by  the  Air  National  Guard.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the  Air
National  Guard  office  of  primary  responsibility  and  adopt   the
rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that  the  applicant
has failed to sustain his burden of proof of having suffered either an
error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive  evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling basis 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 issue 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;  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-
2006-03923 in Executive  Session  on  20  September  2007,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Christopher D. Carey, Panel Chair
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
      Mr. James L. Sommer, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 December 2006, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, NGB/A1P0F, dated 20 June 2007, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 July 2007.




                                   CHRISTOPHER D. CAREY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00803

    Original file (BC-2013-00803.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete A1P evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He was denied promotion because the MS ANG reneged on his assignment orders without advising him just weeks after arriving on station. The resource to promote him to the grade of SMSgt as reflected on his orders was taken away when another member was placed in his position. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01454

    Original file (BC-2006-01454.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01454 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: JOEL RICHARDSON HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Authority and Reason for Discharge be changed from Misconduct and his Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code be changed to “Eligible.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03307

    Original file (BC-2006-03307.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The letter asked that he call and he did so numerous times, but received no answer. 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. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03053

    Original file (BC-2005-03053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The State HQ based their denial of his promotion on ANG Instruction (ANGI) 36-2502, wherein it is stated members on 4-P (permanent) medical status are not eligible for promotion consideration. A1POF contends he was denied promotion on 6 February 2004 by the TXANG as he was ineligible in accordance with ANGI 36-2502, Promotion of Airmen, and Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03419

    Original file (BC-2006-03419.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After serving in the Army National Guard (ARNG) in the grade of E6, he was enlisted into a position with the MIANG that was an authorized technical sergeant (E6) position. The attached SME input states the applicant’s enlistment with the MIANG was correct and cites Air National Guard (ANG) 36-2002, Enlistment and Reenlistment in the ANG and as a Reserve of the Air Force, as the basis for their...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-03810

    Original file (BC-2006-03810.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03810 INDEX CODE: 131.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 June 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His promotion effective date (PED) and his date of rank (DOR) to the grade of major be changed from 18 October 2006 to 1 May 2006. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00853

    Original file (BC-2008-00853.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00853 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) and his previously awarded AFCM be upgraded to the MSM, first oak leaf cluster (MSM w/1OLC). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03109

    Original file (BC-2006-03109.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In fact, due to an administrative error, she continued to serve beyond her MSD of 1 June 2006 and was only separated after the error was discovered. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant disagrees with NGB’s opinions and has provided numerous points of contention along with explanations for each. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we can find no documented instance...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01486

    Original file (BC-2006-01486.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His commander and the Adjutant General (TAG) of the State of Indiana recommended him for promotion consideration to the grade of colonel by the Spring 2006 Air National Guard Colonel Review Board that convened on 1 March 2006. His promotion package for consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel by the Spring 2006 Air National Guard Colonel Review Board was submitted to NGB but was not in turn...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00238

    Original file (BC-2009-00238.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The security manager position is a CMSgt position in the SFS. A1PS’s complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B. NGB/A4RDT recommends the Board grant the applicant’s request for reimbursement for his personally procured move (PPM). Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2009-00238 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...