RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02193
            INDEX CODE:  136.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the grade of chief master sergeant (CMSgt).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His ability to receive  fair  consideration  for  promotion  was  eliminated
during the 2006 and 2007 promotion cycles due to inaction by  his  chain  of
command.  During the 2006 promotion cycle his  Enlisted  Performance  Report
(EPR) was due 30 June 2006.  The promotion board met in  November  2006  and
his EPR was not completed until  December  2006.   For  the  2007  promotion
cycle he did not receive an EPR which made  him  ineligible  for  promotion.
Despite having received notification by  the  promotion  authority  that  he
required  a  report  his  rating  chain  took  no  action  to  satisfy   the
requirement.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of his EPR  closing
30 June 2006 and copies of email communiqué.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

After serving 28 years and 26 days on active  duty,  the  applicant  retired
from  the  Air  Force  on  1 April  2008  in  the  grade  of  senior  master
sergeant.  He served as a Traffic Management Superintendent.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDEP  defers  the  decision  for  promotion  to   CMSgt/E9   to   HQ
AFPC/DPSOE, Enlisted  Promotions,  and  recommends  the  AFBCMR  direct  the
following actions in regards to the 2006 and 2007 EPRs:  The  30  June  2006
EPR – change the signature dates of the additional rater to reflect 30  June
2006.  The 30 June 2007 EPR – direct the Evaluation  Reports  Appeals  Board
(ERAB) to have an EPR accomplished.  Additionally,  direct  that  the  dates
signed by the rater, additional rater and reviewer, if  applicable,  reflect
30 June 2007.

DPSIDEP states the application was submitted in a timely manner.  Since  the
applicant has retired, he is ineligible to file an appeal through  the  ERAB
under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-2401,  Correcting  Officer  and  Enlisted
Evaluation Reports, 20 February 2004; and did not file an  appeal  prior  to
retirement.

IAW AFI 36-2406, based on the applicant’s service dates  and  the  close-out
dates of the applicable EPRs, he was eligible for promotion testing in  2006
and  2007;  therefore,  EPRs  were  required  in   both   2006   and   2007.
Furthermore, AFI 36-2406 requires evaluations  to  be  placed  in  the  SNCO
Selection Record no later than 60 days  after  the  close-out  date  of  the
report.  The applicant’s 2006 EPR should have been placed in  his  selection
folder not later than 30 August 2006, and the 2007 report should  have  been
placed in his selection folder not later than 30 August 2007.

The complete DPSIDEP evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOE defers  to  the  recommendation  of  AFPC/DPSIDEP  regarding  the
accomplishment of the 2007 EPR and correction of the 30  June  2006  report.
Should the Board choose to correct the record per DPSIDEP’s  recommendation,
they could direct the applicant be supplementally considered  for  promotion
to CMSgt for cycle 06E9 and 07E9 during the  next  SNCO  Supplemental  Board
(July 2009).  As a matter of  information,  if  the  applicant’s  appeal  is
approved, he would incur a three year ADSC from  the  date  of  his  pin-on,
should he become a select.  He would either have  to  be  directed  back  to
active duty to fulfill his service commitment or  request  the  Board  waive
the three year ADSC.

DPSOE states that since the applicant had  a  weighable  report  (close  out
date between 1 August 2005 – 31 July 2006) on file at  the  time  the  Board
met, he was considered, but not selected,  for  promotion  to  CMSgt  during
cycle 06E9.  Once the 30 June 2006 report was updated, he  was  ran  through
the in-system supplemental process; however,  he  was  never  supplementally
considered through the board process  as  he  never  requested  supplemental
consideration.  The weighted airman promotion system  was  not  looking  for
another report on the applicant for cycle 06E9  since  he  had  a  weighable
report on file and met the initial selection board.

The applicant contends that he was ineligible  for  promotion  consideration
to CMSgt  during  cycle  07E9  because  a  report  was  never  accomplished;
however, that was not the case.  He tested 13 September 2007;  however,  his
test was not scored and his record  did  not  meet  the  board  due  to  his
nonweighable status.  He was honorably retired 1 April 2008 in the grade  of
senior master sergeant (SMSgt).

In order to compete for promotion, you have to be eligible and  your  record
must be weighable.  A weighable record means all the  weighted  factor  data
elements (EPRs, Decorations, USAFSE score, TIG and TIS) are present and  you
will receive promotion consideration during the  original  select  run/board
process.  A nonweighable record means  one  or  more  weighted  factors  are
missing from your promotion file.  All  SMSgts  eligible  for  CMSgt  during
cycle 07E9 were required to have an EPR closing out between  1  August  2006
and 31 July 2007.  Eligibles cannot receive  promotion  consideration  until
their record becomes weighable.  If,  after  the  initial  board  process  a
nonweighable  record  becomes  weighable,  the  member  receives   promotion
consideration during the next scheduled supplemental board.

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 29  August  2008,  copies  of  the  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit  E).   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.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice warranting corrective action.   While  we
are not persuaded by the applicant's assertions  that  direct  promotion  to
the grade of chief master sergeant  is  appropriate  in  this  case,  we  do
believe a measure of relief is warranted.  After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it appears  that  through
no fault of his own, the contested report  closing  30  June  2006  was  not
properly processed in time for consideration during  promotion  cycle  06E9.
As indicated by the office of primary responsibility, the 30 June  2006  EPR
should have been placed in his selection folder not  later  than  30  August
2006,  prior  to  the  convening  of  the  November  2006  selection  board.
Therefore, it is  our  opinion  that  his  record  should  be  corrected  as
indicated below.

Notwithstanding the above, we are not persuaded by  the  evidence  presented
that corrective action is warranted with regard  to  his  consideration  for
promotion during cycle 07E9.  In this respect, we note  that  the  applicant
had applied and received an approved retirement  to  be  effective  1  April
2008.  It appears that it was his rater's assumption that since  he  had  an
approved retirement, completion of a 2007 EPR was optional.   However,  even
though the rater was informed that a report was still required  because  the
projected effective date of his retirement  was  after  1 January  2008,  it
appears a report was not accomplished.  We note  the  opinions  of  the  Air
Force  offices  of  primary  responsibility  recommending  that  an  EPR  be
directed; however, taking into consideration that it  is  each  individual's
responsibility to ensure the accuracy of his or her selection  record  prior
to the convening of the selection board we find  no  evidence  of  such  due
diligence on the applicant's part.  In this respect, the applicant  has  not
provided evidence showing what follow-up actions, if any, he took  prior  to
the convening of the cycle 07E9 board to ensure  the  EPR  in  question  was
accomplished and that his selection  record  was  complete  and  up-to-date.
Therefore, in the  absence  of  persuasive  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we
recommend his records be corrected only to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the  AF  Form  911,  Senior  Enlisted
Performance  Report  (MSgt  through  CMSgt),  rendered  for  the  period   1
September 2005 through 30 June 2006, be amended in  Section  VI,  Additional
Rater's Comments, by changing the signature  date  to  read  30  June  2006,
rather than 8 December 2006.

It is further recommended that he  be  provided  supplemental  consideration
for promotion to the grade of chief  master  sergeant  (E-9)  for  the  O6E9
cycle.


If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent  to  supplemental
consideration that are separate and  apart,  and  unrelated  to  the  issues
involved in  this  application,  that  would  have  rendered  the  applicant
ineligible for the  promotion,  such  information  will  be  documented  and
presented to the  Board  for  a  final  determination  on  the  individual's
qualifications for the promotion.


If  supplemental  promotion  consideration  results  in  the  selection  for
promotion to  the  higher  grade,  immediately  after  such  promotion,  the
records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher  grade
on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion  and  that  he
is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade  as  of  that
date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 23 October 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member
                 Mr. Kurt R. LaFrance, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2008-02193 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 June 2008, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 25 July 2008.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 25 July 2008, w/atch.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 August 2008.




                       THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                       Chair





AFBCMR BC-2008-02193




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 Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to XXX, be corrected to show that the Senior Enlisted Performance
Report (MSgt through CMSgt), AF Form 911, rendered for the period 1
September 2005 through 30 June 2006, be amended in Section VI, Additional
Rater's Comments, by changing the signature date to read 30 June 2006
rather than 8 December 2006.

      It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration
for promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant (E-9) for the O6E9
cycle.


      If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to
supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to
the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the
applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented
and presented to the Board for a final determination on the individual's
qualifications for the promotion.


      If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion, the
records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade
on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he
is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that
date.





      JOE G. LINEBERGER
      Director
      Air Force Review Boards Agency