RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02569 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be reconsidered for promotion to the grade of technical 
sergeant (TSgt) for cycle 09E6, or in the alternative, he be 
given the stripe outright. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was not allowed to test with his peers on both the Specialty 
Knowledge Test (SKT) and PDG (sic) Promotion Fitness Examination 
(PFE) before 31 Dec 09. 

 

He was not able to test SKT for the 09E6 cycle even though he 
gave notice before 31 Dec 09. 

 

He had to correct an Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) which made 
it impossible for him to test in Feb - Mar 2009. The EPR was 
corrected on 29 Jun 09, and he notified the Weighted Airman 
Promotion System (WAPS) testing center by phone that he wanted to 
test. 

 

He was deployed in Sep 09 for four months and when he returned, 
they informed him he would not be testing SKT, but PDG (sic) 
only. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, various emails, and paperwork related to his EPR 
appeal. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of 
staff sergeant (SSgt). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 


 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. DPSOE states there are no 
provisions that would allow any individual an automatic promotion 
to TSgt or any other grade, based on the applicant’s 
circumstances. DPSOE states members cannot test in an Air Force 
Specialty Code (AFSC) for which they are no longer assigned. The 
applicant was properly considered in the correct AFSC based on 
the 1 Nov 09 effective date of the AFSC conversion, using the 
same policies and procedures afforded others in similar 
circumstances. 

 

Members compete for promotion in the AFSC they hold at the 
promotion eligibility cut-off date (PECD). The PECD for cycle 
09E6 was 31 Dec 08, and the applicant’s CAFSC was 2E2X1. The 
applicant states that he did not test during the normal testing 
cycle (1 Feb - 31 Mar) due to a referral report that was in the 
process of being corrected. The EPR closed out 25 Mar 09 and was 
approved for correction by the Evaluation Reports and Appeals 
Board (ERAB) in July. In Aug, the applicant’s servicing Military 
Personnel Section (MPS) contacted the Air Force Personnel Center 
(AFPC) as to his eligibility for testing. At the time, the 
system reflected he was ineligible due to a promotion eligibility 
status (PES) code of “R” (referral) still being updated. Since 
the referral EPR had been corrected, the MPS was instructed to 
correct the PES code and schedule the applicant to test. The 
applicant did not test prior to his departure for deployment in 
Sep 09. 

 

DPSOE indicates that pursuant to SAF/A6 and AF/A3O direction, 
career fields 2E, 3A and 3C converted to various AFSCs within the 
new 3D Cyber Career Field during the 31 Oct 09 AFSC conversion 
cycle. After returning from deployment, the applicant was 
scheduled and tested PFE only on 24 Feb 10 for cycle 10E6 in 
CAFSC 3D1X2 based on the AFSC conversion. Since his current 
CAFSC did not have an SKT, his PFE score was doubled and applied 
retroactively to cycle 09E6. His total score was 303.14 and the 
score required for selection in his AFSC was 310.93 

 

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 19 Aug 11, 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 (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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. 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 and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 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-2011-02569 in Executive Session on 20 Mar 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Jul 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 3 Aug 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Aug 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair