Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04336
Original file (BC 2014 04336.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04336

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His rank on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect Airman First Class (A1C, 
E-3), instead of Airman (Amn, E-2).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was promoted to the grade of A1C in Aug 14, prior to his 
discharge but his DD Form 214 displays his rank as Amn.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the applicant’s DD Form 4/1, Enlistment/Reenlistment 
Document Armed Forces of the United States, on 25 Sep 12, he 
enlisted in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Airman Basic 
(AB, E-1) for a period of four years.

On 3 Oct 13, the applicant received an Article 15 for driving 
while under the influence of alcohol, in violation of Article 111 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  As a result, his 
punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of Amn, 30 days 
extra duty and a reprimand.

On 24 May 14, the applicant received a referral Enlisted 
Performance Report (EPR), for the period 25 Sep 12 through 24 May 
14, as a result of his previous Article 15 action.

On 29 Sep 14, the applicant received an honorable discharge, in 
the grade of Amn and was credited with two years and five days of 
total active service.   


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an 
error or an injustice.  The applicant was not eligible for 
promotion prior to his separation based on the referral EPR and 
provides no supporting documentation in support of his 
contention/request.

Based on the applicant's 3 Oct 13, Date of Rank (DOR) to the grade 
of Amn, on 3 Aug 14, he would have met Time­In-Grade (TIG) 
requirements for promotion to the grade of AlC (10 months TIG).  
However, his referral EPR with a close out date of 24 May 14, 
rendered him ineligible for promotion.  In accordance with AFI 36-
2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, Table 1.1, Rule 22, 
airmen in grades airman basic through A1C meeting TIG/Time in 
Service (TIS)_ promotion requirements can be promoted no earlier 
than the close out date of an EPR with a rating of "3" or higher 
that is not a referral, if otherwise eligible and approved by the 
commander.

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 Jan 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  
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.  Insufficient 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; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


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-2014-04336 in Executive Session on 10 Jun 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	                   , Panel Chair
	                  , Member
	                        , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Oct 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 19 Nov 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Jan 15.




Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03312

    Original file (BC 2013 03312.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01056

    Original file (BC 2014 01056.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01056 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Article 15 and Unfavorable Information File (UIF) be removed from his record and that his rank be restored. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends the Board not grant the relief sought regarding the Article 15 because there was no error or injustice with the process. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01123

    Original file (BC-2012-01123.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100224

    Original file (0100224.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00224 INDEX CODES: 111.02, 126.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, imposed on 16 Nov 98, be set aside and removed from his records, and that all rights, privileges, and benefits taken from him because of the Article 15 be restored. A complete copy...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703590

    Original file (9703590.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and indicated that basic eligibility requirements for promotion to senior airman are a minimum of 36 months' total active federal military service (TAFMS) and 20 months' time-in- grade (TIG) as an airman first class (both requirements must be met) or 28 months' TIG whichever is satrsfied first, not be ineligible for any of the reasons outlined in AFI 36-2502, Table 1.1, or Headquarters...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01771

    Original file (BC-2010-01771.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant’s date of rank (DOR) to SSgt during cycle 94A5, he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002866

    Original file (0002866.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Since filing his appeal, he has been promoted to the grade of SRA with a DOR of 15 Feb 01. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this appeal are contained in the applicant’s military records (Exhibit B), and the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force (Exhibits C, D and E). TEDDY L. HOUSTON Panel Chair AFBCMR 00-02866 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01578

    Original file (BC-2010-01578.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPSOE further notes even if the performance report were removed from his records, he would still be ineligible for promotion to A1C on 16 Aug 09, as he was no longer on active duty in the Air Force. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801494

    Original file (9801494.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant’s request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The applicant is requesting the AFBCMR void her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 23 Oct 94. In the applicant’s response dated 17 Nov 94 to the referral EPR, she states that she realizes that ‘she has a lot of reprimands in her Personal Information File (PIF) and didn’t consider herself ready for promotion.’ She also states...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05675

    Original file (BC 2013 05675.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 Jul 81. On 29 Jul 82, an evaluation officer reviewed the applicant’s case and recommended he be discharged from the Air Force and furnished a general discharge for a progressive downward trend in his attitude and duty performance. On 24 Dec 85, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicant’s request to upgrade his discharge and reenlistment code, and...