RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03077
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be considered for supplemental promotion to the grade of
Master Sergeant (MSgt) by the Cycle 95E7 promotion board.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her Air Force Commendation Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster
(AFCM, 1OLC) for the period 7 Dec 90 31 Aug 94 should have been
considered in the promotion process for cycle 95E7.
The Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider
her application because, in 2014, a former Chief Master Sergeant
(CMSgt) and her former commander, reviewed her documentation and
believes that she was unjustly denied supplemental promotion
consideration, when she originally requesting it, in Jul 95.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 1 Jan 96, the applicant retired from active duty, under the
provision of the Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA), in
the grade of TSgt, with a Date of Rank of 1 Jan 91. She was
credited with 18 years, 5 months, and 19 days of active duty
service.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends the applicants request be denied on
timeliness.
The applicant was considered and nonselected for promotion to MSgt
during cycle 95E7. Her decoration score was 5.00, her total score
was 335.94, and the score required for selection in her Air Force
Specialty Code (AFSC) was 337.43. If the decoration (worth three
points) were counted in the applicant's total score, she would
become a selectee for promotion. Promotion selections for this
cycle were made on 26 May 95 with a public release date of 7 Jun
95.
The applicant's request for supplemental promotion consideration
for cycle 95E7 was denied by AFPC/DPPPW (Enlisted Promotions) on
21 Aug 95 due to noncompliance with AF policy (AFI 36-2502, Airman
Promotion Program, 20 Jul 94). Specifically, the decoration was
not placed into official channels prior to the date selects were
made (26 May 95). It further states that supplemental promotion
consideration will not be granted if the error or omission
appeared on the member's data verification record (DVR), and no
corrective or follow-up action was taken by the member prior to
the promotion selection date.
AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Awards and Decorations Program, defines
"official channels" as the first endorsement to the Decor 6,
usually the commander's endorsement. In the applicant's case, the
Decor 6 was signed but not dated. According to message R 211959Z
Aug 95, (AFMPC Enlisted Promotions) contacted a representative of
the 497 IG to inquire as to when the decoration was placed into
official channels since the Decor-6 was undated. The
representative stated that the decoration was not placed into
official channels until 5 Jul 95 (after selects were run on 26 May
95 and publicly released on 7 Jun 95).
The complete DPSOE 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 12 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:
After careful consideration of applicants request and the
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.
The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged
error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United
States Code, § 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603. The
applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in
filing, and we are not persuaded the record raises issues of error
or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we
cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicants failure to file in a timely manner.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision
of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2014-03077 in Executive Session on 14 Apr 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Jul 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 29 Aug 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Sep 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02893
Prior to submitting his request to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFCMR), he submitted a supplemental promotion consideration package to the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) promotions section requesting that both decorations be considered. He spoke with the Base Level Awards and Decoration Element, researched the Air Education and Training Command policy and AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program, and found the Décor-6 reflects when it...
Applicant was considered for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), and selected, by the 92A6 promotion cycle with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 October 1991. Subsequent to the applicant’s retirement from the Air Force on 1 January 1996, he was awarded the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) for the period 2 March 1986 to 31 December 1990, for meritorious service, per Permanent Orders 310-01, dated 6 November 1997. As stated by AFPC/DPPPWB, had the Defense...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-01133
Applicant was considered for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), and selected, by the 92A6 promotion cycle with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of 1 October 1991. Subsequent to the applicant’s retirement from the Air Force on 1 January 1996, he was awarded the Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) for the period 2 March 1986 to 31 December 1990, for meritorious service, per Permanent Orders 310-01, dated 6 November 1997. As stated by AFPC/DPPPWB, had the Defense...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01490
Per AFI 36-2502, paragraph 2.8.3.1, a supplemental request based on a missing decoration must have a closeout date on or before the PECD and the commanders recommendation date on the Décor-6 must be before the date AFPC makes the selections for promotion. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The investigation by his chain of command clearly shows credible evidence that the MSM recommendation was placed into military channels and was...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04722
She requested supplemental consideration for selection to E-6, but her request was denied and she was told to file a claim with the Air Force Board of Corrections of Military Records. 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/DPSOE recommends denial, indicating...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03002
Had he received the DFC when the other crew members did, he would have been selected for promotion to master sergeant (E-7) during the 2008 E7 promotion cycle. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of a photograph of the aircrew in question, special orders reflecting the award of the DFC to the other aircrew members, unsigned documentation related to his submission for the DFC, his weighted airman promotion system score notice for the contested promotion cycle, and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00838
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB states that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD). A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 11 July 2003, for...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02889
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: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating the applicant has provided no supporting documentation or conclusive evidence that the decoration was in official channels prior to selections for promotion cycle 12E5. In accordance with...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01327
He was considered but not selected for promotion to the grade of SMSgt during the 96, 97, 98, 99, 00 and 01, E-8 promotion cycles. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of his request to change his DOR to SMSgt. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial of his request for supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of CMSgt, to remove his EPR ending 12 October 1990, and...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04004
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04004 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be granted supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) for promotion cycle 12E6. The applicant was considered and non- selected for promotion to E-6 during promotion cycle 12E6. The remaining relevant facts...