RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00038
INDEX CODE: 110.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7) with an
effective date of 13 May 2005.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She met all promotion requirements, to include completion of the
Noncommissioned Officer Academy (NCOA) as of 13 May 2005.
Paperwork was submitted recommending her for promotion to E-7
with her commanders concurrence; however, the paperwork was
lost. Due to medical issues in 2006, she was out on convalescent
leave until August 2007 and unable to pursue this matter. Upon
her return, she was consumed with pressing mission requirements
and dealing with her medical profile. Personnel changes of key
leadership, first sergeant, and commander positions had occurred
during this timeframe.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement, a copy of her NCOA Certificate of Completion, medical
documentation reflecting surgery admission, a Fitness Monitor
letter certifying fitness compliance, a letter of support from
her commanders, electronic communication concerning National
Guard Bureau guidance, and excerpts from the unit manning
document.
A copy of the applicants complete submission, with attachments,
is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently an Active Guard/Reserve (AGR) member
of the New Mexico Air National Guard who was promoted to the
grade of technical sergeant (E-6) with a date of rank of
22 August 2002.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PS, in concurrence with NGB/A1POE, recommends denial.
NGB/A1POE indicates they reviewed all the documentation provided
by the applicant and found the documentation does not support the
request to promote her to the grade of E-7 with the requested
effective date. It is A1POEs opinion that the inordinate amount
of time that has passed without action by the applicant or the
unit, coupled with the fact that she has still not been promoted
by her unit to E-7, is reason enough to recommend relief not be
granted in this case. In addition, the applicant has failed to
provide documentation showing she was the sole occupant of a
master sergeant position and that the units authorized/assigned
figures to master sergeant at that time would have supported a
promotion on the requested promotion effective date.
The complete A1PS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 3 September 2010 for review and response within 30 days
(Exhibit C). 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 an 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.
Therefore, the applicants request 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-2010-00038 in Executive Session on 13 October 2010,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-00038:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Dec 09, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 23 Aug 10, w/atch.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Sep 10.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04184
A1POE states, in accordance with the applicants point credit summary, he did not participate in enough UTA days from his initial enlistment date of 20 Sep 2008 to the date of the erroneous discharge, on 1 Aug 2010. ________________________________________________________________ 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;...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01133
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 17 December 2010, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). The applicants contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04104
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at Exhibit B. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03830
Thereafter, the 109th Force Support Squadron (109th FSS) Commander demoted the applicant to staff sergeant with an effective date and date of rank of 22 Jan 10. After a review of the information provided and the additional information provided by her unit, A1POE was not able to find sufficient evidence to determine she was not given due process. The complete NGB/A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05966
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05966 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reenlistment eligibility (RE) code on his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, be changed from 6U (Air National Guard (ANG) Not Selected for Retention by the Commander) to 6A (ANG Eligible to Reenlist/Extend Selected by...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03628
In support of the request, the applicant provides copies of her DD Form 256AF, a letter from the National Personnel Records Center, her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and a NGB Form 22. A1POE state they are unable to recommend any relief at this time since it appears the applicants time in the Air National Guard is correctly documented. The applicant was advised to contact HQ ARPC to see if a record of this time exists.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02538
When enlisted promotions in the Air National Guard are approved a promotion order is written using the promotion board date as the DOR. As such, there is no way the promotion order would have been published directly after the board convened. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04345
________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1POE recommends denial, stating, in part, other than his own claim that he was discriminated against, saying that the commander, was finally fired for sexual harassment, he provides no information concerning his discrimination claim. In his request, the applicant also states that his commander submitted paperwork for his promotion but the member does not state when that was or provide any...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02258
His promotion to the grade of senior airman (E-4) be adjusted to an effective date of 1 February 2009. AFI 10-201 refers the applicants career field to the Prime Ribs Managers Guide. The mission capabilities statement that was provided with the applicants request is from the guide and states Specific grades denote SORTS critical positions. The listing only has two positions that have specific grades; both of them are 7-level AFSCs. We took notice of the applicant's complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04167
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04167 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. As such, the applicant was erroneously separated from the Air National Guard and incurred a debt for his reenlistment bonus. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was a member of the...