RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02668
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His official records be changed to show that:
1. His effective Date of Rank (DOR) was 1 Aug 06.
2. He was selected from promotion to Master Sergeant (MSgt) on
the FY11 Central Master Sergeant Selection Board.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His TIG to TSgt was improperly recorded as 7 May 10, the date of
his enlistment onto active duty, while it should have been
1 Aug 06, the date he initially sewed on TSgt in the Air
National Guard. At the time he was a full time active duty
Guardsman, which is equal to an active duty member. This TIG
error prevented him from testing for MSgt in 2011 and 2012, and
denied him consideration for promotion on both the FY11 and FY12
Master Sergeant Selection Boards.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The 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 and D.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIPE recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence
of an error or injustice. According to AFI 36-2604, Service
Dates and Dates of Rank, Paragraph 8.1, reservists who enlisted
in a pay grade higher than the last grade held in a regular
component receive a Date of Rank (DOR) equal to the date of
enlistment in the Regular Air Force (RegAF). After a thorough
review of his RegAF and ANG records, it is determined the
applicant did not hold the rank of TSgt while serving in the
RegAF and therefore, this DOR is equal to the date of his
enlistment.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIPE evaluation, with attachment,
is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOE defers to DPSIDEs recommendation. The applicant is
a prior service member who served in the RegAF for 4 years,
10 months, and 3 days. He was discharged in the rank of Senior
Airman (SrA) on 31 Jul 03, and enlisted in the ANG on 1 Aug 03
as a SrA. He was discharged from the ANG in the rank of MSgt on
6 May 10 and was accessed into the RegAF in the rank of TSgt
with a DOR of 7 May 10, without having previously served in the
RegAF in the rank of TSgt. Based on his DOR of 7 May 10, the
applicant was not eligible for promotion consideration to MSgt
during cycle 11E7 due to insufficient TIG (eligibles must have a
DOR or 1 Jul 09 or earlier). He was considered for promotion
during cycle 12E7, but was not selected for promotion.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 11 Sep 12 for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
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 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 recommendation
of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs) and
adopt their 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 the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2012-02668 in Executive Session on 28 Feb 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIPE, dated 13 Jul 12m w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 17 Aug 12.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Sep 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03312
His Date of Rank (DOR) to the grade of Airman First Class (A1C) be corrected to 31 Jul 2001 (Administratively Corrected). In a letter dated 10 Jan 2014, AFPC/DPSOE advised the applicant his DOR to the grades of SrA, SSgt, TSgt and MSgt were administratively corrected and that he would receive supplemental promotion consideration for promotion to the grade of SMSgt during the May 2014 Senior Noncommissioned Officer (SNCO) Supplemental Promotion Board. After a thorough review of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03355
Based on the applicant’s DOR as a SrA of 13 June 1992, the first time he was considered for promotion to the grade of SSgt was cycle 94A5. The AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In an undated letter, the applicant reiterated his contention that based on Air Force Pamphlet 36-2241, paragraph 15.41.2.SrA, which states that A1Cs are promoted to SrA with either 36 months TIS and 20...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01113
The complete DPSIPE evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of Staff Sergeant (SSgt) indicating the added points are not sufficient enough as to render him a select for any previous cycle. Based on the applicants 26 Feb 95 DOR to the grade of SrA, the first time he was considered for promotion to SSgt was cycle 96A5. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01841
For these acts, the applicant was punished by a reduction in grade to staff sergeant, with a date of rank of 7 Mar 07, and a reprimand. The applicant was rendered a referral EPR for the period 15 Aug 06 through 15 Mar 06 (sic), which included the following statements: During this period member indecently assaulted a female Airman for which he received an Article 15/demotion, and Vast potentialdemonstrated poor judgment unbecoming of an Air Force NCOconsider for promotion. On 18 Mar...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03464
Her current Date of Rank (DOR) be changed from 1 June 2013, to 28 May 2009; the date she reentered the Regular Air Force 3. They reaccomplished the applicants Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS)_ evaluation worksheet based upon her updated point credit summary report and deemed that she still does not meet the requirements in accordance with AFI 36- 2002, Regular Air Force and Special Category Accessions, paragraph Attachment 4, paragraph A4.2, Prior Service (PS) Date of Rank and...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03542
He should receive supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of MSgt based on the correction to his records. The application has not been filed within the three year time limitation imposed by AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. Regrettably, promotion records are only kept on file for 10 years In Accordance With (IAW) AFR 4-20, Records Disposition Schedule, as such, there are no promotion records available to verify whether the applicant was considered...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01771
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01771 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Between the date of his reduction to the grade of Amn (27 Jan 04) and his last day on active duty (31 Dec 04), the applicant held no higher grade than Amn. Based on the applicants date of rank (DOR) to SSgt during cycle 94A5, he was...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01934
On 10 Oct 06, the applicant received an MSM (2OLC) for retirement for the period 18 Nov 05 through 30 Nov 06. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicants request to reinstate the MSM for retirement indicating there is no...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04035 (2)
In a letter dated 22 Oct 13, the demotion authority reinstated his grade to SSgt with his original Date of Rank (DOR) of 9 Jan 13. As such, if the applicant wants to make a request to remove the referral EPRs, he must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations, such as the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. ...