RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02258
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His initial enlistment rank be adjusted from airman basic (E-
1) to airman first class (E-3).
2. His promotions to the grades of airman (E-2) and airman first
class be voided.
3. His promotion to the grade of senior airman (E-4) be adjusted
to an effective date of 1 February 2009.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His recruiter made an interpretation error when she enlisted him
in the Air National Guard (ANG). His Air Force Specialty Code
(AFSC) was on the critical list making him eligible to enlist in
the grade of airman first class. This administrative error
caused an unjust ripple effect in his career resulting in a later
promotion to senior airman. His commander has indicated that he
would have promoted the applicant to the grade of senior airman
on 1 February 2009 based on the correct enlistment grade of
airman first class.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a letter of
support from his commander; enlistment order; promotion orders;
an excerpt of ANG Instruction 36-2002, Enlistment and
Reenlistment in the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the
Air Force; a Mission Capabilities Statement, and electronic
communications.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Minnesota ANG in the
grade of senior airman (E-4) with a date of rank of 1 November
2009.
The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants
service records, are contained in the Air Force evaluation at
Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PS recommends denial. A1PS agrees with the evaluation by
A1POE who states that ANG Instruction 36-2002, Table 1.6, Rule 5,
indicates that an enlistment grade of E-3 is authorized if a
member enlists into an AFSC listed in Air Force Instruction (AFI)
10-201, Status of Resources and Training System (SORTS), Table
3.1. 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. The e-mail traffic submitted
with the applicants request, provided by the National Guard
Bureau (NGB) was general in nature and not specific to the
applicants career field. According to NGB/A1SC, not all 3M0XX
positions are critical as the applicant states in his request.
A1POE states the applicant has provided no evidence to show that
an error or injustice has occurred.
The complete A1PS evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 20 August 2010, for review and comment 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 an 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 the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
basis to recommend granting 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-02258 in Executive Session on 15 March 2010 under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2010-02258 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 22 Mar 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 9 Aug 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Aug 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00209
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00209 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code be changed to one that will allow him to re-enter the military. The Medical Consultant lauds the applicants desire to once again serve, and the support he has received from his parents, an employer, his youth pastor, and a...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 02758
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He served honorably for 2 years in the Air National Guard (ANG). The NGB/A1PS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 Aug 10 for review and comment within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00849
Further, AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, states, separate or discharge an ANG member who is not qualified or eligible for worldwide deployment. 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 the applicant has not been...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05226
The complete NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit D. NGB/A1PF does not provide a recommendation but states that upon review of the applicants debt generated against his Aviator Continuation Pay agreement, they have concluded that, as it currently stands, the debt is valid. Additionally, the applicant has not provided supporting documentation to establish a basis to extend his MSD or show that he was treated in an unjust manner with respect to his promotion and repayment of ACP. ...
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 | CY2011 | BC-2010-01596
On 10 Dec 10, NGB/A1PS informed the applicant that he had not exhausted the administrative remedies regarding his application for correction of his military records. 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01152
On 5 October 2005, his commander signed a Notification of Intent to Discharge letter and recommended he be discharged with a general discharge. IAW AFI 36-3209 Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, a member is discharged for unsatisfactory participation when the commander concerned determines a member has no potential for useful service under conditions of full mobilization. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01044
His retired pay is based on 2,680 retirement points and over 33 years of service for basic pay in the grade of technical sergeant. The complete DPP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and provided copies of documents associated with the events cited in his appeal. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01044
His retired pay is based on 2,680 retirement points and over 33 years of service for basic pay in the grade of technical sergeant. The complete DPP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and provided copies of documents associated with the events cited in his appeal. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00813
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00813 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to give him Whistleblower protection; show his graduation from Air War College (AWC); his reinstatement to the New York Air National Guard (NYANG) or comparable posting; promotion to the grade of colonel (O-6) backdated to the...