Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00660
Original file (BC 2014 00660.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-00660
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her promotion to Staff Sergeant (E-5) be effective 1 Sept 13, 
instead of 1 Jan 14. 


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She did everything necessary to obtain the rank of Staff 
Sergeant.  She completed all required training and Professional 
Military Education (PME).  Her unit took almost five months to 
update her records to reflect completion of PME, which unjustly 
delayed her promotion.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in 
the grade of Staff Sergeant (E-5), effective and with a date of 
rank of 1 Jan 14.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/A1K recommends approval.  Upon careful review of the 
applicant’s duty history and confirmation from the member’s 
commander it has been confirmed the applicant met all 
eligibility criteria for promotion to Staff Sergeant on 
1 Sep 13.  Promotion to said grade requires the attainment of a 
5 skill-level in the air force specialty code (AFSC), 12 months 
time-in-grade, four years of time-in-service, graduation from 
airman leadership school (ALS) and approval from the commander.  
If the applicant’s 15 Aug 13 graduation from Airman Leadership 
School (ALS) had been timely updated in the system, the 
commander would have promoted the applicant on 1 Sep 13.

A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit C).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case and agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and 
adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  
Therefore, we recommend the applicant's records be corrected as 
indicated below.	


THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to reflect that she 
was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), effective and 
with a date of rank of 1 Sep 13, instead of 1 Jan 14.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-00660 in Executive Session on 19 Feb 15, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
	
	




All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The 
following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-00660 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Feb 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFRC/A1K, dated 21 Mar 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01630

    Original file (BC 2014 01630.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01630 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Date of Rank (DOR) to the grade of Senior Airman (SrA) be changed from 5 Mar 14 to 13 Jan 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00579

    Original file (BC 2014 00579.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 Jan 13, the applicant signed DD Form 1966, Record of Military Processing – Armed Forces of the United States. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. They completed a careful review of all documentation regarding the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02811

    Original file (BC 2014 02811.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The commander was told that since the applicant was a ten year First Sergeant who did not hold a 9- skill level she could not remain a CMSgt and that there was not a method for First Sergeants to be promoted to CMSgt. A complete copy of the rebuttal is at Exhibit F. ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s MILPDS record was reviewed and noted as follows: 16 Jan 03, member last held AFSC 2A671; 17 Jan 03, member was selected into a SDI 8F000 (First Sergeant); 1 Mar 11,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01639

    Original file (BC 2014 01639.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K recommends approval, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. Individuals must meet the following criteria for promotion to Airman, have six months time in grade (TIG) after entering Initial Active Duty Training (IADT) and to be eligible for promotion...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05059

    Original file (BC-2012-05059.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She had a break in service from 4 Nov 10 until 14 Jan 11, at which time she reenlisted in the Reserve. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Therefore, the applicant’s correct...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00436

    Original file (BC-2011-00436.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00436 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her rank of master sergeant (E-7) be reinstated with her original date of rank of 1 January 2008. The discharge board that convened on 27 January 2011 found the applicant did not wrongfully use marijuana and recommended she be retained in the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02423

    Original file (BC-2011-02423.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, if the applicant had been granted career status while being assigned to the CMSgt position it would have meant that she could have remained at Scott AFB until 2019 when she becomes eligible for an active duty retirement. We note the applicant’s assertion that she was selected for the superintendent position and subsequently promoted to the grade of CMSgt and due to her selection for the superintendent position her date of separation should be changed to 28 Feb 14. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc-2013-01202

    Original file (bc-2013-01202.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was set-up by Chief Master Sergeant M----- and the United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) Headquarters personnel in retaliation for filing a CI. On 2 Oct 06, the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) disapproved the applicant’s application for retirement submitted on 31 Jan 06 and stated that retirement at this time was not considered in the best interest in the Air Force. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05436

    Original file (BC 2012 05436.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Before issuing the LOR, the OG/CC requested a copy of the LOR purportedly given to the applicant while performing duties at Tyndall AFB since there was no record of the LOR in the applicant’s personnel file. The OG/CC never received a copy of said LOR and therefore documented the applicant’s misconduct with the LOR, dated 18 Sep 10. A complete copy of the AFRC/JA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03238

    Original file (BC-2011-03238.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his requests, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of the Memorandum for Non-recommendation for Promotion, his 2 Nov 08 PT score, Member Utilization Questionnaire, email communiques, EPP Eligibility Rosters, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, a Point Credit History Summary, and various other documents associated with his request. The relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air...