RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-00436
                                             INDEX CODE:  110.00
                                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he was eligible  for  promotion  to  the
grade of technical sergeant for cycle 06E6, he was  selected  for  promotion
to the grade of technical sergeant for promotion cycle  06E6,  and  that  he
was promoted to the grade of technical sergeant with a date  of  rank  (DOR)
of 1 Nov 06.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was misinformed by his supervisors as to the correct  time  to  show  for
testing, which caused him to be late, considered a no-show and  subsequently
rendered ineligible for promotion for  the  06E6  promotion  cycle.   He  is
aware of another individual who reported late for testing  and  was  allowed
to test for promotion.

His commander approved his request to reschedule  his  test  date,  but  the
Military Personnel Flight (MPF)  chief  and  commander  denied  his  request
without following governing instructions.

In support of the request, the applicant provides a personal  statement  and
supporting documentation related to his request.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant currently serves in the Regular Air  Force  in  the  grade  of
technical sergeant.

On 28 Sep 06, he was scheduled for out-of-cycle testing for promotion  cycle
06E6 due to a 93-day contingency temporary duty assignment.  On  5  Oct  06,
he was provided a testing date of 18 Oct 06, and he acknowledged receipt.

On 18 Oct 06, the applicant arrived at the testing room  late  and  was  not
allowed to test.  His commander  was  notified  that  he  arrived  late  for
testing  and  that  he  was  not  allowed  to  test  for   promotion.    The
notification  recommended  the  commander  counsel  the  applicant  on   his
responsibilities in  regard  to  promotion  testing,  and  it  provided  the
commander with  a  list  of  valid  reasons  to  consider  for  rescheduling
testing.  The notification  also  stated  that  being  late  should  not  be
considered favorably in deciding whether to reschedule testing, and to  have
the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) monitor  return  the  memorandum
by 20 Oct 06 to request a new test date.

The applicant petitioned to his commander to  reschedule  promotion  testing
and on 20 Nov 06, his request was approved.

On 20 Nov 06, the request was disapproved by the MPF Chief and  the  Mission
Support Squadron (MSS) commander, stating that in accordance  with  AFI  36-
2605, Air Force Military Personnel Testing System,  the  applicant’s  excuse
was not a valid reason to reschedule  testing,  promotion  testing  time  is
never changed, and that he was informed of the correct time  to  report  for
testing.

The applicant tested for the 07E6 promotion cycle; however, the WAPS  system
reflected him eligible and awaiting test for cycle 06E6.  As  a  result,  he
was mistakenly considered for cycle 06E6 using cycle 07E6  test  scores  and
was rendered a select.

On 11 Jun 07,  the  applicant’s  MPF  was  notified  of  his  selection  for
promotion under promotion cycle 06E6.  On 12 Jun 07, his promotion  eligible
status was updated to reflect that he was ineligible for cycle  06E6,  which
removed his selection for promotion under cycle 06E6.

On 9 Jul 07, the applicant was considered  for  supplemental  promotion  for
cycle 07E6 using the test scores for the promotion cycle 07E6, and  selected
for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant.  He was promoted  to  that
grade on 1 Oct 07.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial.  DPSOE  states  in  part,  the  applicant  was
ineligible for promotion consideration for promotion  cycle  06E6  since  he
failed to appear for testing at the scheduled time.

Failure to report for scheduled testing renders  an  airman  ineligible  for
promotion consideration unless the commander  approves  rescheduling  within
10 workdays.  The applicant’s commander did not approve  rescheduling  until
20 Nov 06, 32 days after the test date.

The MPF chief states the applicant’s contention of miscommunication is  just
an excuse.  The testing time never  changes  and  is  always  at  0750.   He
signed a document on 5 Oct 06, that acknowledges a testing time of 0750  for
18 Oct 06.  The MPF commander agreed the applicant was  making  excuses  and
disapproved his request to reschedule his test date.

Although the applicant’s promotion eligibility status  was  not  updated  in
the  MILPDS  for  cycle  06E6,  the  error  was  caught  during   the   data
verification process.  He was  considered  and  selected  for  promotion  to
technical sergeant during cycle 07E6.

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The documentation he was provided reflecting a test date does  not  indicate
the testing time.  He signed the AF IMT 1566, but was not  provided  a  copy
of the form.  During this  time  frame,  he  was  undergoing  life  changing
events.  When he called his supervisor to inquire about  the  testing  time,
he was told to be at the testing center at 0800.

The MPF did not correctly update his promotion eligibility  status  code  in
accordance with the governing instruction.   His  commander  was  unable  to
request that he be rescheduled for promotion testing due to  his  being  out
of the immediate area.

The MPF did not comply with the governing instructions in  denying  him  the
opportunity to reschedule promotion testing.

He has provided substantial evidence to  show  that  governing  instructions
were not followed, all  the  facts  were  listed,  and  his  DOR  should  be
corrected.

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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  error  or  injustice.   After  a  thorough  review   of   the
applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded the relief requested should  be
granted.  It appears the applicant attempts to place the responsibility  for
his tardiness on others since he was on leave prior  to  testing.   However,
the evidence of  record  clearly  reflects  the  applicant  acknowledged  in
writing his testing date and time.  As such, we believe he  was  responsible
for arriving at the testing center at the  prescribed  time.   Further,  the
governing Air  Force  Instruction  states  that  rescheduling  will  not  be
authorized  for  reasons  within  the  airman’s  control.   We  believe  the
applicant is solely responsible for arriving on time for  promotion  testing
and he failed to meet that obligation.  Therefore,  we  find  no  compelling
basis to warrant favorable  consideration  of  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-2009-00436
in Executive Session on 1 Sep 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mrs. Robert H. Altman, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Joseph A. Yount, Member
                       Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jan 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 17 Feb 09.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Mar 09.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Mar 09, w/atchs.




                                   ROBERT H. ALTMAN
                                   Panel Chair