RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02076
		INDEX CODE:  111.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 13 July 1999 through 31 May 2000, be removed from his records and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) for the 01E5 promotion cycle.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The EPR was prejudiced by his initial investigation, court-martial and incarceration, which occurred during the reporting period.  The EPR will affect future testing opportunities, if it remains in his records.  The investigation during his upgrade training, in addition to his court-martial preparation were key factors for his failure of the end-of-course test.  His state of mind, the significant interruption in training, and subsequent skill level upgrade prevented him from testing and possible selection to E-5.  His supervisor and chief enlisted manager obtained an out-of-cycle test date for him, but this does not address the time he missed testing and possible time in grade he could have acquired since then.  

In support, the applicant provided copies of his performance reports and copies of documents related to his court-martial.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of senior airman (E-4).  He was considered and selected for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant by a supplemental board for the 01E5 promotion cycle (promotions effective 1 September 2001 - 1 August 2002).

The applicant’s EPR profile follows:

	      PERIOD ENDING			OVERALL EVALUATION

			12 Jul  98							4
			12 Jul 99							5
		   *	31 May 00							4

*  Contested Report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB stated that when initial promotion selections were made on 10 July 2001, the applicant was ineligible for consideration because he had not been upgraded to the required 5-skill level Primary Air Force Specialty Code (PAFSC) by the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD) of 31 March 2001.  A senior airman must have a 5-skill level PAFSC by the PECD to be eligible for promotion consideration to staff sergeant.  Since the applicant did not attain the required skill level until 1 May 2001, after the 31 March 2001 PECD for the 01E5 cycle, he was ineligible for promotion consideration when selections were made on 10 July 2001.  Because of the circumstances (investigation, court-martial, confinement) which caused an interruption in his upgrade training that prevented upgrade by 31 March 2001, he was granted a PAFSC skill level waiver.  As a result of this waiver by his commander, he was determined to be eligible for the 01E5 cycle and was administered the required promotion tests in August 2001.  He was considered by supplement board on 7 September 2001, and was selected.  His total score was 244.61 and the score required for selection in his AFSC was 241.14.  His promotion sequence number (PSN) is 9887.5.  Since 2,030 individuals were promoted on 1 September 2001, the first month of the promotion cycle, AFPC/DPPPWB anticipates the applicant will be promoted in the December 2001/January 2002 timeframe.  Contrary to the applicant’s belief that he lost time-in-grade that he would have acquired had he been considered on 10 July 2001, it makes no difference that he was not considered and selected initially for promotion.  He cannot be promoted until his PSN is incremented, regardless of when he was considered.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP recommended denial, stating that the EPR does not mention the investigation, court-martial, and incarceration during the reporting period.  Therefore, the applicant has not substantiated that the EPR is inaccurate because it was prejudiced by these events.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the evaluations were provided to the applicant on 5 October 2001, for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit E).  As of this date, he has not responded.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  We noted the applicant's assertions that the report will affect future testing opportunities and that he could have acquired more time in grade had he not missed testing time during his court-martial investigation.  However, as noted by the office of primary responsibility, the applicant was selected for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant with the EPR closing 31 May 2000, in his record.  Therefore, the removal of the report would have no impact on his selection for promotion.  Moreover, supplemental promotion consideration is moot, since he was selected during the 01E5 cycle.  The applicant received the same promotion sequence number (PSN) he would have received had he been initially considered and selected.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 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 13 November 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Vice Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 2001, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 10 Sep 2001, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 27 Sep 2001.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 5 Oct 2001.