RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02697
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the grade of chief master sergeant (E-9).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His commanders were provided erroneous information regarding the promotion requirements for promotion to E-9.  The information they were provided was based on "perception," not the requirements of the AFI.  They were told that Professional Military Education (PME) was required when it was not.  He has been in an E-9 position since October 1994.  Every time the promotion issue came up he was told that he needed to complete Senior NCO Academy (SNCOA).  However, none of the commanders verified that criteria.  It appears that the AFIs are to be used as "guidance" and not as "directives."

In support of his request, applicant provided copies of his Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) closing on 6 Feb 01, 6 Feb 99, 13 Apr 87, and 13 Apr 86; copies of email communications, an excerpt from AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program; and, documents associated with his Inspector General (IG) complaint.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the personnel data system reflects that the applicant, a former Air Force Reserve enlisted member, was promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant on 1 Nov 83.  His name was placed on the Retired Reserve List on 16 Jul 02.  He has completed 31 years of satisfactory Federal service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFRC/DPM reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.  DPM states that he is correct in stating that SNCOA is not needed for promotion to E-9.  Since he provided no documentation from his commanders indicating that he would have been promoted to E-9, approval of his request cannot be recommended.  The DPM 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 11 Oct 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice that would warrant the applicant's promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant.  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 that absent supportive evidence from his commander recommending the applicant for promotion, favorable consideration of his request is not warranted.  Therefore, we adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  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 issue 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 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 Docket Number 02-02697 in Executive Session on 18 Dec 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 02.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFRC/DPM, dated 12 Sep 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Oct 02.