RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04104
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her rank/grade on her NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and
Record of Service, be changed from staff sergeant/E5 to
technical sergeant/E6.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In July or August of 1995, she took a mandatory urinalysis
during a weekend drill. The commanding officer had a security
police escort her to the restroom to make sure she took the
test. She was allowed to speak with counsel regarding the case,
which dragged on for a year. She was eventually demoted, but
she believes it was due to racial bias.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement, her rating decision from the Department of Veterans
Affairs, copies of her demotion orders, her NGB Form 22 and
other supporting documentation.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard on 23 May 1985.
On 16 February 1996, the applicant was demoted to the grade of
staff sergeant. She retired on 16 September 1997 in the grade
of staff sergeant. She was credited with 22 years, 3 months and
23 days of total service for pay.
On 4 November 2011, per the applicants request, her case was
administratively closed. It was reopened on 29 November 2011.
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.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1POE recommends denial. Special Order AJ-175, states the
authority for the applicants demotion was in accordance with
AFI 36-2503, Administrative Demotion of Airmen, which states
airmen may be demoted who do not fulfill noncommissioned officer
responsibilities. She voluntarily retired with an honorable
discharge.
Her discharge was accomplished in accordance with Air Force
policies and procedures. There is no evidence provided showing
an error or injustice.
The complete A1POE evaluation is at Exhibit B.
NGB/A1PS concurs with the A1POE, the subject matter expert, and
recommends denial of the applicants request.
The complete A1PS evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 29 February 2012 for review and comment within
30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response
(Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by
existing law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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 and the available
evidence of record in judging the merits of the case; however,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation NGB/A1POE and adopt
its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 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 2010-04104 in Executive Session on 5 April 2012, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dtd 8 Apr 10 and 28 Oct 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1POE, dated 7 Feb 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PS, dated 15 Feb 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Feb 12.
Chair
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 | CY2010 | BC 2010 02315
In addition, members are ordered to attend UTA unless they have an authorized excuse for absence. Counsel states the applicant absented himself from weekend drills so that he could work other higher paying jobs. However, it should be noted that many traditional guard members give up the opportunity to earn more money on UTA weekends. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
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-2010-00038
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. In addition, the applicant has failed to provide documentation showing she was the sole occupant of a master...
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-2011-04692
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04692 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His reentry (RE) code of 6U (Not Selected for Retention by Commander) be changed to a code that would allow him to reenlist. So should he desire to enlist with another ANG unit, it will not be a barrier to his enlistment. We took notice of the...
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 | 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-02087
On 24 February 2012, the applicant received notification from the unit wing commander that he was recommending her for demotion to the grade of E-4, Senior Airman. Their interpretation of the instruction is the unit commander may recommend demotion of an enlisted ANG member under his/her command. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application BC-2012-02087 in Executive Session on 23 January 2013, under...
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...