RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03207 INDEX CODE:	131.01

COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be given supplemental consideration for promotion to technical sergeant (TSgt) for cycle 07E6.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was given incorrect instructions regarding his Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) test. He should have been eligible to test and compete in his control Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) of 2A553B, since he had entered retraining after the promotion eligibility cut-off date (PECD).

Prior to his retraining on 29 Jan 07, he held the primary AFSC 2A573B. Shortly after reporting to training he received a WAPS test date of 9 Mar 07, which stated that he would be testing under the 00XXX AFSC, with a Skills Knowledge Test (SKT) exemption, or to test and compete with those in his future career field (1N3X5E), on material he did not even have the clearance to view. Based on information provided by the local Military Personnel Flight, he tested under the 00XXX AFSC, with an SKT exemption.

He studied as though he would test as a 2A5X3B for the 07E6 cycle. However, upon approval for retraining, he was given only five calendar days of notification to report for training. The beginning of the promotion cycle happened to be about the same time he reported, so he studied for his prior career field’s SKT up until the testing cycle.

He was denied the opportunity to test in a career field he knew well despite proper procedures.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, his WAPS score notice, an Enlisted Promotion Program Fact Sheet, and his Permanent Change of Station orders.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt).

On 31 Aug 06, while serving in AFSC 2A5X3, he was approved for selective retraining into AFSC 1N3XX with a class start date of
29 Jan 07.
The PECD for promotion cycle 07E6 was 31 Dec 06. This date is used to determine which data (i.e. performance reports, decorations etc.) will be included in the consideration process and which Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) the airman will compete in for promotion.

Airmen competing for promotion under the Weighted Air Promotion System (WAPS) are administered two tests, the Specialty Knowledge Test (SKT) (questions pertaining to the airman's particular CAFSC) and the Promotion Fitness Examination (PFE) (general knowledge questions i.e. standards, dress & appearance, AF history etc.).

Once approved for retraining a Date Initially Entered Retraining (DIERT) date is established. Individuals entering a retraining status on or before the PECD date are SKT exempt for the promotion cycle and compete for promotion in AFSC 00XXX. Members are given the option to test in the new CAFSC, if desired. According to applicable Instructions, DIERT dates are established as the class start date or in the case where a permanent change of station is involved, the date the airman departs the losing duty station. In this case the applicant departed his losing duty station o/a 22 Jan 07. Therefore, he should have competed for promotion in cycle 07E6 in CAFSC 2A5X3 since he entered retraining status on 22 Jan 07, after the PECD. However, it appears his retraining status erroneously reflected that he entered retraining status prior to 31 Dec 06 and he was only administered the PFE.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSOE indicates according to AFI 36-2502, paragraph 2.3, applicant was tested and considered for promotion during cycle 07E6 in the incorrect AFSC. He should have been considered in AFSC 2A5X3B since he did not depart for retraining until on or about 22 Jan 07 (after the PECD of 31 Dec 06). DPSOE indicates that although there are policies and procedures in place to correct this error, they are no longer available due to the applicant’s delay in identifying the discrepancy. DPSOE further states as an exception to policy, the Board could direct the applicant’s total score received in the retraining AFSC 000XX (PFE only) be applied to the cutoff score for AFSC 2A5X3B.  The

applicant would, however, still remain a nonselect as his total score was 286.26 and the score required for selection in AFSC 2A5X3B was 308.46.

Members compete for promotion in the AFSC they hold at the promotion eligibility cutoff date (31 Dec 06 for cycle 07E6). Since members compete for promotion by AFSC, everyone in an AFSC is required to take the same version of the test. There are occasional instances where a member takes a different version because the member was confused about their Control AFSC due to retraining, restructure of an AFSC, etc., or in the applicant’s case, the system reflected erroneous data. For fairness, test scores within an AFSC need to be comparable. When a member takes a different version than the others competing for promotion in his or her AFSC, the incorrect test version is equated through a scientific process which allows them to fairly compare scores on two different test versions. It accounts for the differences in test difficulty and computes what a member’s score would have been if they had taken the correct version. The equated scores are scientifically accurate, equitable, and legally defensible.

In the applicant’s case, this process cannot be used since he tested PFE only (000XX is an SKT-exempt AFSC). They could not equate a double PFE to an AFSC that required a PFE and SKT (2A5X3B). Tests become obsolete on the PECD of the current promotion cycle. For the cycle in question (07E6), the tests became obsolete on 31 Dec 07. The AFPC guidelines for supplemental promotion consideration when the test is obsolete is as follows: “When a member is competing for promotion for more than one cycle, he or she takes only the current version(s) of the test and the test results are applied retroactively to the applicable cycle(s). Airmen authorized supplemental promotion consideration that do not have test scores for that cycle use WAPS test scores from the first testing cycle following the supplemental promotion cycle for which test scores are available.” This process cannot be applied in the applicant’s case as he tested in his new AFSC (1N3X5E) for cycle 08E6.

The applicant’s allegation of miscounseling has not been substantiated based on the documentation he has provided. It is ultimately the applicant’s responsibility to know his eligibility status, the study references required, how he will be considered (with both PFE and SKT or the PFE only), and when he will test. Members eligible for promotion testing and consideration are provided an AF Form 1566 (WAPS Test Verification) approximately 30-45 days prior to testing. The 1556 informs the member of their scheduled date/time of testing, as well as, their testing requirements. The applicant signed the 1566 on 15 Feb 07, acknowledging in which AFSC he was to be considered/tested. Although he states that he “recently” reviewed the Enlisted Promotion Fact Sheet and discovered he was given incorrect instructions, the 07E6 fact sheet was available to him beginning in Dec 06 (prior to his test date).   Had he questioned his

testing requirements and/or petitioned the AFBCMR before 31 Dec 07, he would have been able to take the correct test.

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit B.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 26 Sep 08, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has not been received.

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 warranting corrective action. In this respect, the applicant is requesting supplemental promotion consideration for promotion cycle 07E6. The basis for his request is essentially that as of the promotion eligibility cut-off date (31 Dec 06), he was erroneously identified as being in a retraining status and was considered SKT exempt for cycle 07E6, in accordance with policy governing those in a retraining status; even though he correctly believed he should have competed for promotion in AFSC 2A5XX and administered the SKT. However, because of the lapse in time between the occurrence of the error and his submission of his AFBCMR application, the materials required to administer him the proper SKT examination are no longer available. In these instances, under an available alternative method of correction, the PFE scores may be applied to the SKT score to determine if the required score for selection is attained. The Air Force office of primary responsibility has already performed the appropriate computation of his WAPS score utilizing his PFE score as his SKT score and has determined that he would not become a selectee. Accordingly, it is our opinion that further consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant is not warranted and therefore, we recommend denial of his request.

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(s) 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 BC-2008-03207 in Executive Session on 13 Nov 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2008-03207 was considered:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 20 Aug 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 8 Sep 08.
Exhibit C.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Sep 08.

Panel Chair