RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02874
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) scores for cycle
02E7 be released.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Due to Stop Loss and the cancellation of his retirement, he was
authorized to test for master sergeant (MSgt, E-7) during cycle
02E7. However, when results were publicly released, he did not
receive a score notice denying him a potential for promotion to
MSgt.
He served honorably for 23 years and was accountable to Air
Force regulations, Aircraft Technical Orders and the Uniform
Code of Military Justice, and cannot understand why he was
denied a promotion opportunity.
In support of his request, the applicant submits an additional
DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Record.
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant retired from the Regular Air Force in the grade of
technical sergeant (E-6) on 30 Sep 2002. He served 23 years,
1 month, and 11 days of active service.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicants military records are contained in
the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force
at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AETC/DPSOE states they are unable to provide test
results/score notice for cycle 02E7 as the applicant was never
considered for promotion because he did not take the required
Specialty Knowledge Test (SKT). A review of his promotion
history file reflects a test score for the Promotion Fitness
Examination (PFE), but there was no score for the SKT. Testing
requirements for his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) indicated
that he should have taken the PFE and the SKT. Consequently
prior to the selection process for cycle 02E7, the applicant's
promotion file was deactivated.
Ten years have elapsed since he tested in cycle 02E7; therefore,
DPSOE has no way of knowing why the applicant did not take the
SKT. Results for cycle 02E7 were released on 27 Jun 2002 and
the applicant retired 30 Sep 2002.
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Due to Stop Loss he was authorized by his commander, first
sergeant and the Air Force Military Personnel Center (AFMPC) to
test for MSgt in Cycle 02E7. He took the SKT and PFE on the
same day; however, when test results were released, AFMPC
refused to release his test results. The Base Promotions and
Testing section also attempted to obtain his test scores to no
avail. Consequently, he went to the inspector general and they
provided no assistance. AFPCs assertion that he never took the
SKT is not true. His test scores were either never put in, or
purged from his records. He served honorably for 23 years. He
reiterates that he was held accountable to the Air Force during
his career and would like to know why he was denied his
promotion test scores.
His complete response 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 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 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 recommendations
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and
adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We
carefully considered the applicants response to the Air Force
evaluation; however, there is no evidence to corroborate his
recollection that he took the SKT. Simply put, after all this
time, even if we assume that the applicant correctly recalls
taking the SKT, that score is no longer in the records, if it
ever was. Consequently, there is no WAPS score to be released.
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 this application
in Executive Session on 10 Jul 2012, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-02874:
Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 7 Jul 2011 and 4 Oct 2012.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOE, dated 27 Apr 2012.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 2012.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 25 May 2012.
Panel Chair
As an alternative, if the Board determines that the applicant has suffered an injustice, it could consider directing supplemental consideration using the applicant’s PFE score from the next cycle, 02E7 (testing 15 Feb -31 Mar 02), and applying it retroactively to the 01E7 cycle. While it does appear that the applicant was provided erroneous information regarding what he would be tested on, we do not believe it warrants direct promotion. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03124
He was not given his Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) study material in a timely manner to prepare for his promotion test. The Promotion Eligibility Cut-Off Date (PECD) for promotion cycle 13E5 was 31 Mar 13. We took notice of the applicants 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 the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02569
DPSOE states members cannot test in an Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) for which they are no longer assigned. After returning from deployment, the applicant was scheduled and tested PFE only on 24 Feb 10 for cycle 10E6 in CAFSC 3D1X2 based on the AFSC conversion. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02799
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB advised that the applicant was erroneously considered, tested, and selected for promotion to MSgt during cycle 05E7 in AFSC 2T1X1. Based on the 14 Dec 04 promotion testing notification, and data listed in the MilPDS and the WAPS, the applicant was erroneously considered, tested, and selected for promotion in his 2T AFSC to MSgt during cycle 05E7. We therefore recommend he be provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02215
Her promotion test to staff sergeant (SSgt) for cycle 88A5 be scored and credited for promotion. DPPPWB finds no error or injustice occurred when the applicant was required to retest after it was discovered that she took the wrong test. ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03286
The applicant has tested two other times for promotion to E-7 and received an SKT score of 32.63 for cycle 01E7 and 44.32 for cycle 02E7. Since the WAPS was approved by the Secretary of the Air Force on 3 July 1968, over 50,000 tests have been manually scored and the results compared against the computer score. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 02579
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C, D, G and H. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends the applicants request to have his leave restored be granted. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicants request...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03527
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of a screen shot of her Training Status Code from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS), an excerpt from AFI 36-2502 Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, her Weighted Airman Promotion System Score Notice, and an AF IMT 330, Records Transmittal/Request. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force Offices of Primary Responsibility (OPR), which are attached at...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03617
On 4 April 2001, the applicant was notified by her commander of her academic release from the NCOA and of the convening of an Academic Review Board. Based on the applicant’s DOR to TSgt, the first time she was considered for promotion to MSgt was cycle 02E7. The applicant was academically released from the NCOA and the CEPME commander denied the appeal.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03962
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03962 COUNSEL: NONE (DECEASED FORMER SERVICE MEMBER) HEARING DESIRED: NO (APPLICANT) APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The service member received an overall rating of 9 on the APR rendered for the period 20 Jul 74 through 26 May 75 with a recommendation to promote. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force...