Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2004-00487-2
Original file (BC-2004-00487-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                                 ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00487
            INDEX CODE:  136.00
            COUNSEL:  FRANK SPINNER
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect  he  retired  in  the  grade  of  Master
Sergeant (E-7), effective 1 Dec 03 or  that  his  records  be  corrected  to
direct advancement to the grade of E-7 effective upon 30 years  of  combined
active duty and retired service.

_________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

In his initial application, the applicant requested:

      1.  The charge of failure to  go,  violation  of  Article  86  of  the
Uniform Code of Military Justice, be removed from the Article 15 imposed  on
him on 18 Aug 03.

      2,  His reduction to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) imposed  as
punishment under Article 15 on 18 Aug 03 be set aside or  suspended  and  he
be returned to the grade of master sergeant (E-7).

On 10 Jun 04, the Board considered and  denied  his  request  after  finding
that he had not provided the evidence necessary to  substantiate  his  claim
that the punishment he received was too harsh given his retirement and  that
his  retirement  also  precluded  the  Article  15  from  being  used  as  a
rehabilitative tool.  In addition, because he  signed  his  application  for
voluntary retirement on 21  Sep  03,  after  he  had  already  received  the
Article 15, the Board felt it appeared it was his own decision to leave  the
service when he did (Exhibit G).

The applicant has since procured the services of counsel, and  requests  his
case be reconsidered based on new evidence.  Applicant refutes  the  Board’s
conclusion that it was his “own decision to leave the service when he  did,”
but declares that he had no choice but to retire based  on  Air  Force  high
year of tenure rules.

In  support  of  his  latest  request,  he  submits   counsel   brief   with
attachments.

His complete submission is at Exhibit H.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial.  Applicant’s enlistment date was 5  Dec  01
and his date of separation (DOS) was 4 Dec  03.   In  1991,  the  Air  Force
established 24 years Total Active Federal Military Service  (TAFMS)  as  the
high year tenure (HYT) for MSgt, the limit in  place  on  the  date  of  his
enlistment.  Applicant’s HYT as MSgt of 5 Nov 03, and AFI  36-3203,  Service
Retirements, para 2.20., required that he retire the first day of the  month
after HYT, or not later than 1 Dec 03.

Effective 1 Jan 03, the Air Force raised the HYT of MSgt to 26  years  TAFMS
and the HYT for TSgt to 24 years TAFMS.  Applicant, while in  the  grade  of
MSgt, did not extend or reenlist for  the  additional  two  years  allowable
under the new HYT policy.  Meanwhile, the commander reduced the  applicant’s
grade to TSgt effective 18 Aug 03.  As a result of his reduction  in  grade,
the Air Force prohibited him from  enlisting  or  extending  past  24  years
TAFMS, the new HYT for TSgt.  With a 4 Dec 03 DOS and his TSgt HYT of 5  Nov
03, he either would have had  to  voluntarily  request  retirement  for  the
first day of the month following his HYT (1 Dec 03) or be discharged on  his
DOS of 4 Dec 03.

He would have  been  discharged  on  4  Dec  03  if  he  had  not  requested
retirement on 1 Dec 03, the first day of the month after reaching  his  HYT.
The law clearly states that an enlisted member must request retirement  from
the Air Force.

The complete DPSOE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant was required to retire on  1  Dec  03.   The  Air  Force  advisory
opinion agrees that, contrary to what was  said  in  the  AFBCMR’s  original
decision, the applicant could not choose to remain on active duty  in  order
to regain the rank he lost as a result of the Article  15  punishment.   The
advisory  opinion  does  not  address  the  remaining  claims  made  by  the
applicant and should be given no weight.

Counsel’s complete submission is at Exhibit K.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After a careful reconsideration of the  applicant's  request  and  his  most
recent submission, we do not find it sufficiently compelling  to  warrant  a
revision of the Board’s prior decision in this  case.   Counsel’s  brief  is
duly noted; however, we were not persuaded that the  applicant’s  retirement
was improper or not in compliance with the governing instructions in  effect
at the time.  Therefore, we agree with the  opinion  and  recommendation  of
the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt  its  rationale  as
the basis for our decision to deny the relief sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of probable 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 9 Dec 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Ms.  Audrey Y. Davis, Member
      Ms.  Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in  AFBCMR  Docket  Number
BC-2004-000487:

      Exhibit G. Record of Proceedings, dated 26 Jul 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit H. DD Form 149, dated 1 Jan 08, w/atchs.
      Exhibit I.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOR, dated 9 Oct 08.
      Exhbiit J.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 08.
      Exhibit K.  Letter, Counsel, dated 23 Nov 08.




                                  BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                  Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00223

    Original file (BC-2004-00223.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 10 Sep 03, the Board did not restore his SSgt grade but instead promoted him to senior airman effective 9 Apr 03 and waived the HYT restriction so he could be eligible for promotion consideration by the 04E5 cycle. His present reenlistment (RE) code of 4D renders him ineligible to reenlist because of HYT restrictions, i.e., he has not yet been promoted to SSgt. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPRR notes the applicant is not reenlistment eligible,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03136

    Original file (BC-2002-03136.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03136 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the rank of master sergeant (MSgt) (E-7) effective 1 Sep 93 or later, but not later than 1999, with back pay. The applicant states that he wants two years pay as a CMSgt. The applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03136

    Original file (BC-2002-03136.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03136 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the rank of master sergeant (MSgt) (E-7) effective 1 Sep 93 or later, but not later than 1999, with back pay. The applicant states that he wants two years pay as a CMSgt. The applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03988

    Original file (BC 2013 03988.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In a letter to the applicant dated 10 December 2013, AFPC/DPSID advised him that his first avenue of relief for his request to replace the 14 January 2012 EPR with the 4 July 2011 and 16 January 2012 electronic EPRs would be through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends the applicant's record be corrected to reflect promotion to the rank of TSgt with a Date of Rank (DOR) and Promotion Effective Date (PED) of 1 May 2013. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01771

    Original file (BC-2010-01771.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01771 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Between the date of his reduction to the grade of Amn (27 Jan 04) and his last day on active duty (31 Dec 04), the applicant held no higher grade than Amn. Based on the applicant’s date of rank (DOR) to SSgt during cycle 94A5, he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00431

    Original file (BC 2014 00431.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was told that he would receive an honorable discharge with full separation pay under HYT but the error with his promotion caused him to only receive half separation pay. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to be considered for promotion to the grade of TSgt indicating he was separated on 17 Dec 13 and ineligible in accordance with AFI 36- 2502, Airman Promotion Program Table 2.1. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00365

    Original file (BC-2007-00365.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states that at the time he was considered for promotion to MSgt, he had more than 12 months left until retirement. Counsel opines that based on the stipulations in AFI 36-2502 and AFRC 36-2102, the Air Force could have, and should have, granted the applicant the promotion to master sergeant (MSgt). The waiver was denied because the applicant would have only been able to perform duty as a MSgt for 10 months before reaching his mandatory retirement at High Year of Tenure Date of 20 Mar 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02844

    Original file (BC-2002-02844.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has provided no evidence of a clear error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03785

    Original file (BC-2008-03785.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03785 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His request for retirement effective 1 Jun 09 be withdrawn, and his promotion sequence number for promotion to the grade of master sergeant be reinstated. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2015 | BC 2015 00270

    Original file (BC 2015 00270.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00270 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reinstated to Active Duty (AD) and promoted to the grade of Technical Sergeant (TSgt) with a date of rank and effective date of 1 Oct 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are...