ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04179-2
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. Her records be corrected to reflect she was promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7), effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 10.
2. She was retired in said grade on 1 Mar 12.
________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
On 2 May 13, the Board considered and denied applicants request indicating they did not find her arguments or the documentation presented sufficient to conclude that her request for an extension of her enlistment to obtain retainability for promotion was not appropriately handled when it was apparently returned without action to the recommending official for further justification. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.
On 13 Jun 13, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration. In support of her request, she submits a statement from a former member of her chain of command indicating that her continued retention and promotion was operationally necessary and that his directorate leadership fully supported the applicants continued retention and promotion to the higher grade.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support of her appeal, the majority remains unconvinced the applicant has been a victim of an error or injustice. While the majority notes the statement provided by a former member of the applicants chain of command indicating that he fully supported the applicants request to extend her enlistment to obtain the retainability necessary to be promoted, we do not find this statement, in and of itself, sufficient to conclude the applicant was the victim of an error or injustice. In our original decision of this case, we noted that the prescribing directive clearly indicated that a request for an extension of an enlistment must be based on the needs of the Air National Guard and, based on the evidence before us, it was clear that the entire justification for the action was to facilitate the applicants promotion to the higher grade. While the supporting statement provided by a former member of the applicants chain of command indicates that her continued retention was an operational necessity, we do not find these assertions, rendered four years after the events in question, sufficient to come to the inescapable conclusion that her request, even if it included this information, would have been approved. Ultimately, after a review of the totality of the evidence presented, we are not persuaded that the applicants request for an extension of her enlistment was not appropriately returned without action when it was determined that it lacked the justification required in accordance with the governing instruction. Therefore, 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 probable material error or injustice; 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-2012-04179 in Executive Session on 27 Mar 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny the application. XXX voted to correct the records, but does not desire to submit a minority report. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04179 was considered:
Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 21 May 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Jun 13, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON DC
Office of the Assistant Secretary
MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
SUBJECT: AFBCMR Application of
I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members. A majority found that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of an error or injustice and recommended the case be denied. I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted. Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.
Please advise the applicant accordingly.
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04179
As such, the applicant failed to meet the retainability requirements for promotion to the grade of master sergeant. While the applicant argues that her case turns to the purported failure of NGB/HR to process her request for an extension her enlistment, we do not find her arguments or the documentation presented sufficient to conclude that her request for an extension was not appropriately handled when it was apparently returned without action to the recommending official for further...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC 2010 00051
While the advisory noted she received proper and fair consideration for promotion, she believes there are not any AD commanders who would award a definitely promote recommendation to an individual whose record lacked career status, nonselections for promotion, intermediate PME, graduate degree, with a history as a Reserve member competing for promotion on AD with other Regular AF officers who are many years her junior by service time, DOR, total service and age. The applicant contends she...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03248
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03248 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member in the Air Force Reserve who served as a Clinical Nurse, Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 46N3. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00914
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00914 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Remove her non-selections for promotion to the grade of major (0- 4) from her records. The applicant’s Officer Selection Brief (OSB), dated 25 Jan 11, reflects no errors. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 12.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05077
Based upon the presumed sufficiency of the referral OPR as served, and insufficient evidence to support the allegations made by the applicant, they find that the referral comment mentioned in the applicant's contested report was appropriate, and as such there is no basis in which to support removal of the contested evaluation. After reviewing all of the evidence provided, we are not persuaded the applicants referral OPR should be expunged and her record be given Special Selection Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05678
Separation for non- retained members is required to be completed prior to 31 Dec of the year in which the retention board is convened in accordance with ANGI 36-2606, Selective Retention of Air National Guard Officer and Enlisted Personnel. TAG is the ultimate authority for any retention decision six months beyond 31 Dec. No other basis exists for this action and the ATAG was investigated and allegations were substantiated.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01650
__________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was eligible for promotion to the grade of major on 22 June 2009 based on provisions of Title 10, United States Code (USC), Section 1372, even though she was already medically retired. The complete A1POP evaluation is at Exhibit B. __________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02900
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C, D, and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP recommends denial of the applicants request for promotion to Master Sergeant, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. ANGI 36-2502, Promotion of Airman, states Prior to promotion to any...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02955
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02955 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her narrative reason for separation be changed from personality disorder to medical discharge. She was discharged for a diagnosed personality disorder however, at the time of the diagnosis she was receiving medical treatment from Mental Health and was...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01465
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01465 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Total Federal Commissioned Service Date (TFCSD) be adjusted to remove all periods assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) and Standby Reserve. On 21 July 1992 she requested separation, which was approved and completed effective 30 September...