RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04737 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be corrected to reflect that she was promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She would have been promoted to senior master sergeant were it not for her chronic medical condition; her condition precluded her from attending the Senior NCO Academy (SNCOA) and she was therefore was not promoted until she was medically retired. She requested a Professional Military Education (PME) waiver for promotion several times but was denied by her squadron commander. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that she enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 28 May 92 and was progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7), effective and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 May 08. On 14 Aug 12, the applicant was ordered to be relieved from active duty on 28 Sep 12 and permanently retired for physical disability, effective 29 Sep 12, in the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8). While her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects she held the grade of senior master sergeant, with DOR of 1 May 08, there is no evidence in the applicant’s military personnel records indicating that she assumed said grade prior to her release from active duty. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial, indicating the applicant became ineligible for promotion and did not hold the grade of senior master sergeant prior to her retirement. The applicant’s tentative promotion, with a promotion sequence number of 1041.0, would have incremented on 1 Dec 11; however, because she had not completed the SNCOA prior to the projected pin-on-date, her promotion was withheld pending completion of the required PME. IAW AFI 36-2301, resident SNCOA attendance is mandatory for promotion to senior master sergeant. Enlisted personnel designated for PME may be delayed for medical, mission-related, or personal hardship conditions without prejudice upon approval of the individual’s commander. MAJCOM Commanders and Vice Commanders are the approval authority for SNCOA delays. Wing commanders or equivalent have authority to grant or deny waivers of Enlisted PME (EPME) for promotion to E5, E7, and E9 (sic) for personnel who cannot complete training prior to their projected pin-on date. However, Airmen with approved waivers must attend PME (in the higher grade) within 179 days of their effective promotion date, or as soon as they are available without impacting the mission. The only exceptions are 179 or 365-day deployments. While the applicant’s retirement order appropriately reflects she was retired in the grade of senior master sergeant in accordance with AFI 36-3212, paragraph 5.15.4., her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty, erroneously reflects her highest grade held as senior master sergeant, even though she never assumed the higher grade, but should reflect the grade of master sergeant (E-7) as the grade the member held at the time of her separation/retirement. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates that a PME waiver should have been considered in her case. She indicated that prior to her projected pin-on date, and for several months following, she was on a temporary medical profile, still receiving medical treatment for her condition, and was not yet undergoing a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). She alleges that the wing commander was not provided an opportunity to make a decision regarding her waiver request because it was disapproved at the squadron level. She points out that she stressed her concern over her promotion several times but the enlisted leadership at her squadron led her to believe that a PME waiver would be requested and supported. Therefore, she held off on PME, believing that it would not affect her promotion to senior master sergeant. She was not found unfit for military service until Aug 12, therefore, a PME waiver should have been considered by the appropriate authority. ________________________________________________________________ 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. 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. While the applicant contends that her request for a PME waiver for promotion should have been approved, said waiver does not nullify the requirement to complete the requisite PME, it only authorizes a delay. While the applicant argues that her request for a waiver should have been approved as she was not found unfit until well after her request, she has not presented any evidence to indicate that her ailments, for which she was retired, would not have precluded her from attending in-resident PME within 179 days of the approval of said waiver in accordance with the requirements of the governing instruction. We also note that the applicant’s DD 214, erroneously reflects that she held the grade of senior master sergeant while on active duty; however, we have been advised by the Air Force OPR that her records will be corrected administratively. 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04737 in Executive Session on 4 Jun 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Oct 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 31 Oct 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 12. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 6 Dec 12