RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:	BC-2008-02624 INDEX CODE:	131.00
XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her promotion to senior master sergeant (SMSgt) be reinstated.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She should have competed for promotion to SMSgt in Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 4YOX1, Dental Assistant versus 8A100, Career Assistant Advisor (CAA).

In support of her request, applicant provided a personal statement, copies of email communiqués, a special programs listings, her data verification brief, her Weighted Airman Promotion Score Card and witness statements.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant’s military personnel records reflect she enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 December 1984.

The applicant was considered and selected for promotion to SMSgt during cycle 08E8  in AFSC 4Y0X0. She received promotion sequence number 667.0 which would have incremented 1 October 2008; however, her line number was removed when it was discovered that she had tested in the wrong AFSC.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. DPSOE states that on 25 June 2007, AFPC requested the applicant be assigned as the CAA with a
31 July 2007 report not later than date (RNLTD). On 29 June 2007, a change to her AFSC was approved with a RNLTD of 31 July 2007. If a delay of her RNLTD based on mission needs was needed, a request should have been processed through AFPC for authorization/approval. No action was taken to request a change to her approved RNLTD of 31 July 2007.

Individuals compete for promotion in the AFSC they hold as of the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD). The PECD for cycle 08E8 was 30 September 2007. Since the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) was never updated to reflect the approved CAFSC of 8A100 effective 31 July 2007, as it was the military personnel flights responsibility do so, her promotion file reflected AFSC 4Y0XO as of the PECD. After selects were announced, it was questioned why she had been considered for promotion in AFSC 4Y0X1 when she had been approved for release and was performing duties as a CAA prior to the PECD. After AFPC’s extensive review of the circumstances surrounding her case, it was determined she had been erroneously considered and selected in the wrong AFSC. She was supplementally considered in the correct AFSC (8A100) and was not selected. The attached e-mails clearly show she was approved for release to the CAA career field and performing duties as a CAA prior to the PECD for cycle 08E8. The lack of update to MilPDS does not negate these facts.

The complete DPSOE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant responded stating that on 5 September 2008, the former CAA retired and she was still working in the Dental Clinic and preparing to take over CAA duties full time in October. Both emails sent were requesting access to tools vital to the success of the CAA position and an attempt to lean forward to prepare for full time duties in October. She disagrees that a signature block proves someone is performing the duties. In September 2008, she was leaning forward and ensuring that during the lapse in CAA coverage the established Professional Development Center’s schedule was maintained. She was also training her replacement in the dental clinic.  The letters from the 21SW/CCC and MAJCOM/CCC explain their actions. The 21SW/CCC stated the RNLTD was changed and the appropriate actions were taken. As a senior noncommissioned officer (SRNCO) she asked the appropriate questions concerning her permanent change of assignment (PCA) and the answers appeared to be valid and she had no reason to question her leadership. The CAA functional manger did state CAAs test against other CAAs; however, the comment did not apply to her considering she was not in the CAA billet as well as her command chief stating she would not officially move until after the PECD. She was in both career fields in September 2008 and unable to work fulltime in the CAA career field until October 2008 due to a pending inspection in the medical group as well as training her replacement in the dental clinic. She acted in good faith as a SRNCO and took appropriate actions and cannot answer why the RNLTD change request was not forwarded to AFPC or managed correctly. She was under the impression the move was accomplished   correctly   and   in   accordance   with   proper

instructions.
Her complete response is attached at Exhibit C.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was timely filed.
3.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. While we note AFPC/DPSOE’s guidance to us that individuals compete in the AFSC they hold as of the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), the evidence of record in this case has raised doubts as to whether the applicant was solely performing duties as a CAA prior to the PECD. DPSOE points out that although her military personnel flight failed to update the military personnel data system (MilPDS) as required, it, nevertheless, does not negate the fact she was performing CAA duties. However, from our review of the evidence, it appears she was also performing duties in her old AFSC of 4Y0X1. AFPC/DPSOE further states that if a delay of the applicant’s RNTLD was required, based on mission needs, the request should have been processed through AFPC for authorization and approval. We concede that this procedure should have been followed; however, it appears the unit continued to benefit from the applicant’s performance of duties in her old AFSC as she has indicated she continued to train her replacement as well as help to prepare for an upcoming inspection. We believe to deny the applicant the promotion earned in her old AFSC in this instance and under the circumstances raised would constitute a possible injustice. Additionally, we note the applicant was given some assurances by key personnel in her chain she would be testing in her old AFSC. Consequently, we believe the element of doubt raised should be resolved in her favor. Therefore, we recommend her records be corrected as indicated below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that she was promoted to the grade of SMSgt (E-8) effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 2008.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-02624 in Executive Session on 15 January 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

3

Panel Chair 
Member
Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR  Docket Number BC-2008-02624 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 5 May 2008, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 19 September 2008, w/atchs. Exhibit C.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 December 2008.
Exhibit D.	Letter, Applicant, dated 20 December 2008.

Office of the Assistant Secretary

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC

AFBCMR 2008-02624

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that the pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to XXXXXXX,  XXXXXXX , be corrected to show that she was promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8) effective and with a date of rank of 1 October 2008.