RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02579 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Thirty days of lost leave be restored to his leave balance. 2. His Weighted Airman Promotion Systems (WAPS) test scores for promotion cycle 2011E6 be removed from his records and he receive supplemental promotion consideration for said cycle as if he was Special Knowledge Test (SKT) exempt. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. He was erroneously precluded from using leave while he was in patient status. 2. He should have tested for promotion as SKT exempt while he recovered from his injuries as he was in a patient status. He was given erroneous information when he inquired about testing while in patient status. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). On 25 Jan 13, the applicant filed an Inspector General (IG) complaint alleging administrative errors were made regarding his assignment as a patient to the patient squadron. On 21 Feb 13, the 59th Medical Wing Support Squadron informed the applicant that as a result of his IG complaint, his duty status code, date gained to file, date arrived station (DAS), and duty air force specialty code (DAFSC) of 9P000 were appropriately updated to his records, while efforts were underway to issue corrected versions of his AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, and AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status. In accordance with AFI 36-2101, Classifying Military Personnel (Officer and Enlisted), a patient’s Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) will not be changed as a result of patient status. In accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, service members compete for promotion in the CAFSC they hold at the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C, D, G and H. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends the applicant’s request to have his leave restored be granted. On 24 Apr 10, the applicant was involved in a motor vehicle accident in France. He was admitted to the hospital and underwent several surgeries. On 19 May 10, he was transferred to a medical center in Texas. Subsequently, he received a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) order to Lackland AFB with a report not later than date (RNLTD) of 15 Jun 10. He was returned to duty without limitation on 24 Mar 12. In accordance with AFI 36-3003, Military Leave Program, Special Leave Accrual (SLA) is not authorized for hospitalizations. However, service members who are not eligible for SLA can request recovery of lost leave by submitting an application for correction of military records. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request for supplemental promotion consideration, indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice warranting removal of the WAPs test score for cycle 11E6. On 27 Oct 11, the applicant tested out of cycle for promotion cycle 2011E6. He was considered through the in-system supplemental process and was a nonselect for promotion. His SKT score was 51.00, Promotion Fitness Examination (PFE) score was 52.52, and his overall score was 308.35. The score required for selection in his AFSC was 309.23. In accordance with AFI 36-2005, paragraph 1.19.2, all examinees must inform the Test Examiner (TE) of any mental or physical condition that may prevent them from doing their best or finishing testing. Paragraph 3.3.2, further instructs the TE to the extent possible, to confirm all examinees are comfortable and not fatigued, ill, or distressed. If the examinee is affected by one of these conditions, excuse him/her and reschedule testing for a more appropriate time. The applicant has not provided an AF Form 422 stating he was physically unable to test or inform anyone he was physically unable to test prior to his test date. In fact, the applicant requested he be given a test date for the cycle 2011E6. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: His Letter of Evaluation (LOE) for the period 18 May 10 through 12 Dec 12 reflects his DAFSC as 9A000 and his duty title as patient. He should have been exempt from the SKT portion of the promotion examination and only tested for professional Development Guide (PDG). The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ _ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIC notes as a result of the 31 Oct 09 Cyber transformation, the applicant’s CAFSC 3A051 was converted to 3D051. On 11 Feb 11, his DASFC was changed to 9P000. On 14 Dec 12, his 9P000 Duty AFSC (DAFSC) was removed and replaced with 3D071. The applicant’s CAFSC has not changed again to- date. Per AFI 36-2101, Classifying Military Personnel (Officer and Enlisted), a patient's CAFSC will not be changed as a result of patient status. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIC evaluation is at Exhibit G. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request for supplemental promotion consideration, indicating the applicant was appropriately subjected to SKT testing in his CAFSC. Per AFI 35-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, service members compete for promotion in the CAFSC they hold at the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD). The PECD for 2011E6 was 31 Dec 10. The applicant’s CASFC as of the PECD for 2011E6 was 3DOX1. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit H. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s PCS orders dated 25 May 10 and duty history dated 15 Aug 13 reflects he was on a patient assignment as of 25 May 10 (Exhibit J). ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 an error or injustice to warrant providing the applicant supplemental consideration for promotion. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, to include his responses to the Air Force evaluations, we are not convinced the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant contends that he should have been exempt from specialty knowledge testing (SKT) when he competed for promotion; however, while it appears the applicant’s duty air force specialty code (DAFSC) was not appropriately updated as a result of his being placed in a patient status, we are not convinced he should have been exempt from the SKT portion of the promotion examination. In this respect, we note that in accordance with AFI 36-2101, Classifying Military Personnel (Officer and Enlisted), a patient's control air force specialty code (CAFSC) will not be changed as a result of being placed in a patient status. Therefore, irrespective of whatever errors occurred with respect to the applicant’s DAFSC, in view of the fact that AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, requires that service members compete for promotion in the CAFSC they hold at the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the applicant has presented no evidence to indicate that the CAFSC he held was somehow erroneous, we are not convinced that he is the victim of an error or injustice with respect to his promotion consideration. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice regarding the portion of the applicant’s request to restore 30 days of lost leave. In this respect, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DPSFM and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant’s records should be corrected to the extent indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that 30 days of leave be restored to his current leave balance. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-02579 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 6 Jun 12 and 30 Jan 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM dated 31 Jul 12. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 7 Sep 12, w/atchs. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Sep 12. Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Mar 13, w/atchs. Exhibit G. Letter, AFPC/DPSIC, dated 22 Apr 13, w/atchs. Exhibit H. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 6 May 13. Exhibit I. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 13.