RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04813
		
	 		COUNSEL:  NONE
		
			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.	His promotion to chief master sergeant, with a date of rank 
of 1 March 2013, be reinstated.

2.	As an alternative, he be provided an explanation as to why he 
is being held to a standard of eligibility for promotion that is 
not within Air Force Reserve Component Command enlisted 
promotion policy.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) enlisted promotion and 
demotion policy was folded into an active duty Air Force 
publication AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, 
31 December 2009.  In doing so, AFRC A1 and A1K failed to 
identify the preamble found on page one, sentence two, which 
restricts this application of policy to the Air National Guard 
(ANG) or Reserve.  He was told the former Chief of Air Force 
Reserve provided an e-mail which authorized continued use of the 
previous instructions governing Air Force Reserve Command 
enlisted promotion and demotion policy, until the policy could 
be corrected.  

The Chief of the AF Reserves has the authority to countermand 
Air Force policy instruction.  Adding more credence to the 
question is the fact the Air Force Reserve Command Judge 
Advocate created a field instruction, which echoes the same 
direction the AFRC previously used in the e-mail previously 
mentioned.  Specifically, until the current AFI on enlisted 
promotions and demotions is corrected, enlisted promotion policy 
defaults to the two superseded publications identified above.  

There is no reference to a required Reserve Service Commitment 
(RSC) anywhere in the superseded AFI 36-2502, 6 August 2002.  
There is a good explanation for that.  The Reserve service 
commitment did not come into existence until 2004 when AFRCI 36-
2102 was published.  Even though AFRC agreed to fold their 
enlisted promotion policy into AFI 36-2502, in spite of their 
overlooking the exclusion of the preamble, you will find no 
reference to a requisite Reserve commitment associated with 
promotion criteria.  This is in contrast to active duty 
promotion policy contained in the same AFI.  

On 1 March 2013, shortly after his promotion to chief master 
sergeant his high year tenure (HYT) came into question.  He 
contacted AFRC in an attempt to attain a RSC of two years, which 
is required for promotion to chief master sergeant.  Due to his 
HYT falling 5 months short of the requisite two year service 
commitment, he was told he would have to request a waiver.  He 
was also advised that he should not have been promoted. The HYT 
waiver was submitted on his behalf.  It was subsequently denied 
and as a result, his promotion order to chief master sergeant 
was revoked.  His grade reverted back to senior master sergeant 
with his former rank of 1 November 2008.  

During his entire career, he has followed policy and procedures.  
He takes great pride in his service record and performance 
history.  He has no doubt that he earned the promotion to chief 
master sergeant.  He did not know about the oversight concerning 
the RSC or he would have questioned it in advance of the 
promotion.

Since he does not meet the criteria for a HYT waiver, he 
believes an exception to policy on the service commitment would 
have been warranted.  A waiver of 5 months is a small sacrifice 
from the command he has served faithfully for so many years.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was a member of the Air Force Reserves and retired 
effective 1 September 2014.  The Air Force Reserve component 
limits participation to a total of 33 years creditable service, 
based upon established pay date or age 60, whichever occurs 
first.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1K recommends denial.  Air Force Reserve enlisted members 
are promoted to chief master sergeant in accordance with AFPD 
36-25, Military Promotion and Demotions and Air Force Reserve 
Enlisted Promotion Policy.  Under the provisions of the Air 
Force Reserve Enlisted Promotion Policy, individuals must have: 
9-skill level in their primary Air Force Specialty Code, 24-
months’ time in grade, 14 years of satisfactory service for 
retirement, completed the SNCO Academy, completed the AF Reserve 
Chief Orientation Course, a satisfactory participant in 
accordance with AFI 36-2254V1, Reserve Personnel Participation, 
met Air Force physical fitness standards and be able to obtain 
24 months retainability to be eligible for promotion to chief 
master sergeant.  The individual must be recommended by the 
assigned supervisor and approved by the promotion authority.

The applicant has not provided documentation to substantiate he 
should be reinstated to the rank of chief master sergeant.  He 
did not and could not obtain the 24 months retainability, a 
minimum requirement for promotion to chief master sergeant.  The 
applicant contends the AFRC Enlisted Policy is invalid.  
Contrary to his contention, since 31 December 2009, the Air 
Force Reserve enlisted promotion has been executed in accordance 
with AFPD 36-25.

AFI 33-360, Publications and Forms Management states, if no 
departmental-level guidance is provided, command field units may 
issue command/field instructions to directly implement AFPDs and 
Air Force supplements to Department of Defense Directives.  
Based on this allowance, the AFRC commander issued verbal 
instructions to directly implement AFPC 36-25 and ordered AFI 
36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, dated 6 August 2002, be used 
a procedural guidance to implement the Air Force Reserve 
Enlisted Promotion Policy.  

The applicant’s promotion to chief master sergeant was a command 
policy violation as he did not have, and still is unable to 
obtain the required 24 months retainability due to his high year 
tenure of 1 September 2014.  On 1 March 2013, the applicant’s 
unit erroneously promoted him to chief master sergeant.  The HYT 
denotes the maximum number of years a member may serve in the 
Air Force Reserves before he or she must retire.  In order for 
him to meet the criteria eligibility for a 1 March 2013 
promotion, his HYT date had to have been 1 March 2015 or later.  
The requirement to obtain 24 months retainability must be met, 
thus there is no option for an Air Force Service Commitment 
waiver.  In the interest of fairness and equity to all meeting 
the minimum requirements for promotion eligibility, his 
promotion to chief master sergeant was revoked.

The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

While AFI 33-360 does give AFRC/CC the authority to supplement 
directives, it also gives specific directions on how this must 
be accomplished.  These instructions were not included in the 
advisory from A1K.  He has copied the instructions for the 
Board’s review.  Additionally, he contends the instructions are 
only good for a limited time.  

It is clear that on the day he was promoted, there was not an 
official promotion policy.  AFI 33-360 clearly states the proper 
process for supplementation for an AFI, which does not include 
verbal instructions.  Over his entire career, he has upheld the 
Air Force core values and has heard the phrase “we take care of 
our Airmen.”  This was the opportunity for the AFRC to show 
those words have meaning.  They have failed.
 
The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After 
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s 
complete submission, to include his rebuttal, we are not 
persuaded he is entitled to reinstatement to chief master 
sergeant.  His contentions are duly noted; however, he has not 
provided persuasive evidence to override the rationale provided 
by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR).  
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the 
OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 
the applicant was unable to obtain retainability of 24 months as 
required for promotion to chief master sergeant.  While the 
impact of the retainability requirement may be regrettable, we 
do not find the actions taken serve to make the applicant a 
victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of 
persuasive 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 an 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-2013-04813 in Executive Session on 12 June 2014, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				 
The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Oct 13, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Record Excerpts.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 25 Nov 13.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 14.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant’s Response, 20 May 2014, 
                  w/atch.