ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00735
							INDEX CODE:  131.09

  							COUNSEL:  

  							HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

On 21 Mar 00, the Board considered an application pertaining to the subject applicant, in which he requested that his Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 21 Aug 94 through 25 Jul 95 be declared void and removed from his records, and his records be corrected to reflect that he was promoted to the grade of master sergeant effective and with date of rank (DOR) of 1 Aug 95, rather than 1 Aug 97, with back pay and allowances.  The Board determined that his military records should be corrected to show that the EPR closing 25 Jul 95, the Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and Nonrecommendation for Promotion Letter, dated 26 Jul 95, were voided and removed from his records, and, that he was promoted to the grade of master sergeant with an effective date and date of rank of 1 Aug 95, rather than 1 Aug 97.  The Board further determined that he should be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 98E8.  A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit G (with Exhibits A through F).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) Memorandum, dated 7 Jun 00, directing that the applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant.  According to DPPPWB, because the applicant was ineligible for consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant prior to his retirement date of 1 Aug 99, he never took the USAF Supervisory Examination (USAFSE), which is an integral part of the weighted factors and Senior Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) selection promotion process.  Without a USAFSE test score, DPPPWB indicated it is not possible to provide the applicant supplemental consideration for any previous promotion cycles.  The total USAFSE score and the score of the other weighted factors, is subtracted from the cutoff score required for selection in the member’s promotion Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) to determine what board score he would have required to be selected during the initial selection process.  The board score he needed to be selected also determines which benchmark records would be used as a basis of comparison during the supplemental selection process.  Without a USAFSE test score, it is not possible to apply the mechanics of this process and provide the applicant the supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant as directed by the AFBCMR memorandum.

A complete copy of the DPPPWB letter is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

A copy of the DPPPWB letter was provided to the applicant for review and comments.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit I).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  In earlier findings, we determined that the applicant’s records should be corrected to show that an EPR closing 25 Jul 95, and an LOR and Nonrecommendation for Promotion Letter, dated 26 Jul 95, were voided and removed from his records, and, that he was promoted to the grade of master sergeant with an effective date and date of rank of 1 Aug 95.  The Board further determined that he should be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 98E8.  Regarding the supplemental promotion consideration, the Enlisted Promotion and Military Testing Branch (AFPC/DPPPWB) has advised that because the applicant was ineligible for consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant prior to his retirement date, he never took the USAF Supervisory Examination, which is an integral part of the weighted factors and senior noncommissioned officer (SNCO) selection promotion process.  Without a test score, DPPPWB indicated that it is not possible to provide the applicant with supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant.  The applicant has been so advised but as of this date, no response has been received from him indicating his desires concerning this matter.  Therefore, this case is again presented to this Board for a determination whether the applicant should be directly promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant.  We note that promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant is a two-phase process.  It not only involves a consideration of the weighted factors, but also a central evaluation board.  After a thorough review of the facts and circumstances of this case, no evidence has been presented which would lead us to believe that had the applicant been allowed to test and been eligible for consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant, he would have been a selectee.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the applicant’s direct promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant is not favorably considered.

2.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable material 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 this application in Executive Session on 22 Feb 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit G.  Record of Proceedings, dated 7 Jun 00, w/atchs.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 10 Aug 00.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 5 Sep 00.