RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04168
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty, be corrected to reflect his grade as staff sergeant (SSgt)
(E-5) rather than senior airman (SrA) (E-4).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was selected for promotion to SSgt during promotion cycle
11E5.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement and copies of his DD Form 214, promotion notification,
and an electronic communication.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
served on active duty from 5 April 2005 to 4 October 2011. He
served as a Security Forces Journeyman and was progressively
promoted to the grade of SrA effective 27 September 2007.
The remaining relevant facts, extracted from his military service
records, are contained in the evaluation by the Air Force office
of primary responsibility at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. DPSOE states the applicant was
supplementally considered for promotion to SSgt for cycles 10E5
and 11E5 during the October 2011 in-system supplemental process.
He was nonselected for promotion cycle 10E5, but tentatively
selected for promotion to SSgt for cycle 11E5. He received
promotion sequence number (PSN) 603.0 with a projected date of
rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 November 2011; however, he
became ineligible for promotion consideration when he separated
on 4 October 2011 and was; therefore, an erroneous select.
DPSOE indicates the applicant was no longer on active duty when
the selects were run on 7 October 2011 and released on 13 October
2011. Had his Military Personnel Squadron updated his separation
in the system on 4 October 2011 (effective date of his
separation), he would have never been considered for promotion
and his name would not have erroneously appeared on the list of
tentative selects. Even if the applicant had separated effective
8 October 2011 (the day after selects were run), his promotion
would have automatically been placed in withhold status as he had
not completed Airman Leadership School (ALS) in accordance with
Air Force Instruction 36-2502, Table 1.2, Item 11. The Personnel
Data System (PDS) automatically withholds promotions for those
individuals who do not complete appropriate Professional Military
Education (PME) prior to the promotion effective date. Wing
Commanders or equivalent (cannot be delegated further) are
granted authority to waive enlisted PME for promotion to E5, E7,
or E9 for personnel who cannot complete training prior to sewing
on. Airmen with approved waivers must attend enlisted PME (in
the higher grade) within 179 days of their effective promotion
date, or as soon as they are available without impacting the
mission. The only exceptions beyond 179 days are for 179-day or
365-day deployments.
It is DPSOEs opinion that the applicant is under the
misconception that his Major Command could waive his PME
attendance altogether. This is simply not true, nor would it be
fair or equitable to his peers who have had to complete mandatory
training prior to their promotions.
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 5 December 2011, 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.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing 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-2011-04168 in Executive Session on 30 May 2012, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04168:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Oct 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 5 Dec 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03804
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 2 Sep 11, while deployed in Afghanistan, he looked at his promotion data in the vMPF and noticed his promotion information changed and his official score was above the cutoff. He believes receiving a new score notice in the vMPF constitutes his promotion notification and requests the Board honor this notification of promotion. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01708
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01708 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued 3 Dec 07, in Block 4a/b, Grade, Rate or Rank/Pay Grade, be changed to Staff Sergeant (SSgt/E-5). His untimely application should be considered in the interest of justice because he received a form from the Physical...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00756
The board should still consider whether the Control Roster which was issued not only for the contested FA failure, but also for two additional FA failures should be removed. HQ AFPC/DPSIDE administratively corrected the applicants EPR (by voiding the report) for the period 12 Aug 08 through 11 Apr 10, and replacing it with an AF Form 77 stating not rated for the time period, report was removed by order of Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Additionally, this action resulted in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04430
The applicant received the Article 15 in 2008 and the 2009 report was removed from his records, but the 2010 report was rendered under the supervision of new evaluators. Furthermore, no evidence was provided to support the contention that the 6 Mar 10 performance report was the result of the Article 15. The complete AFPC/DPSOE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He did...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02531
On 31 July 2007, the applicant retired in the grade of TSgt after serving 20 years and 6 months on active duty, _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. Furthermore, had the request for a waiver been approved, which would have been no more than a deferment requiring completion of PME within 179 days of pin-on, she would also have had to serve a two-year active duty service commitment in order to retire in that...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04665
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04665 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be retroactively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt, E-5) effective Jul 13. AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, paragraph 1.11, states airmen selected for promotion to the grade of SSgt must complete in-residence...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02070
DPSID states the applicant did file an appeal through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports; however, the ERAB was not convinced the contested report was inaccurate or unjust. In the applicants case, the feedback date is clearly annotated on the form, and the applicant has not proved, through his submitted evidence that the feedback date as recorded did not in fact take...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01397
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01397 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he was discharged in the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt), rather than senior airman (SrA); and that he was entitled to the Purple Heart, Bronze Star Medal with Valor (BSM w/V), Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03443
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The letter of reprimand (LOR) and referral EPR he received are not the norm in the Air Force for first time fitness assessment (FA) failures. The applicant failed the FA almost five months before the close- out of the evaluation in question and had over four months from the time of his FA failure to overcome the deficiency. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02502
His records be corrected to show that he is now and was promotion eligible during the time he was placed on a Control Roster. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOA recommends closing the case, since the applicant's record currently reflects his requested actions and they do not have the history, nor are they the OPR for control roster actions; however, based on the information provided the previous RE code 4I would have been a result of...