RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-04433

	COUNSEL:  NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive an Active Duty Service Commitment (ADSC) waiver to retroactively retire as a Master Sergeant (MSgt).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should be formally recognized as MSgt since this is the rank he achieved while serving in the Air Force.  He further states that due to him receiving two Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) that were marked down for political reasons, he was not promoted as timely as he would have been otherwise, thus not needing an ADSC.  He is not interested in any back pay or future pay benefits.  He requests a permanent "frocking" to enjoy retirement without the embarrassment of not retiring in the grade of MSgt.  He was selected for promotion to the grade of MSgt; however, he chose to retire.  His letter to the SECAF provides some detail, but at the Board's request he will provide more detail.  Further, at the time of his retirement, certain force shaping initiatives had not yet started and some of the requirements for ADSCs were lifted after he retired.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 26 Jun 91, the applicant entered active duty.

A memo from the applicant to AFPC/DPTO with a subject line “PROMOTION STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING” Suspense: 31 May 12, states the applicant declined promotion and understood that his name would be removed from the selection list and the promotion could not be reinstated.

The applicant applied for retirement on 12 Oct 11 and on 14 Oct 11, he was approved for a 1 Oct 12 retirement date.

On 1 Oct 12, the applicant retired in the grade of TSgt.  He served 20 years and 10 days of active service for retirement.

In a letter dated 20 Sep 17, A1PP advised the applicant that since he declined promotion to the grade or MSgt, they were unable to provide a grade change.  The Force Management programs were only available to those members that pinned on their rank and served for at least 6 months in the grade. Additionally, those programs were only offered to certain year groups and career fields. Neither your year group nor career field was eligible for that program.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denying the application.  DP2STM state the guidance for TERA during FY12 is Personnel Services Delivery Memorandum (PSDM) 12-30, dated 6 Apr 12.  This guidance as outlined in this PSDM is authorized by the order of the Secretary of Air Force.  The Air Force developed this program to meet congressionally mandated end strength requirements while positioning the force to meet current and future mission requirements.  This PSDM provides provisions for enlisted airmen in non-critical specialties to request early retirement prior to 20 years of Total Active Federal Military Service, to include Limited Active Duty Service Commitment waivers, along with waivers for up to two years on their current enlistment contract and promotion commitment waivers of all but six months for early separation or retirement.  The attachments to this PSDM contain specific eligibility criteria and application procedures for the above-mentioned program.

The applicant mentions in his documents that at the time of his retirement, certain force shaping initiatives had not yet started and that some of the requirements for ADSCs were lifted after he retired.  The applicant’s selection for promotion to the grade of MSgt required a two-year ADSC.  However, the applicant was not eligible for this program at the time of his retirement.  Per that guidance, members who chose to retire under Temporarily Early Retirement Authority (TERA) program during FY12, were to apply from 10 Apr to 30 Apr 2012, and must have met the basic eligibility requirements.  Eligibility criteria for this program was as follows: “The FY12 TERA program will consider enlisted Airmen in the grades of SSgt, TSgt, and MSgt if they will have more than 15 years (but less than 20 years) Total Active Federal Military Service by 1 Sep 12.  Eligible Airmen must be in non-critical specialties, and must retire NLT 1 Sep 12.”  As of 1 Sep 12, the applicant had over 20 years of service, making him ineligible for the FY12 TERA program and would not have had his ADSC waived had he accepted the promotion.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

USAF/A1PP recommends denying the application.  A1PP states the applicant declined promotion; therefore, they are not recommending a grade change.  The Force Management programs he referred to in his letter were only available to those members that pinned on their rank and served for at least six months in the grade.  Additionally, those programs were only offered to certain year groups and career fields.  Neither the applicant's year group nor his career field were eligible for that program.  There is no evidence of an error or injustice.  The applicant held the rank of TSgt on the date of retirement and was retired in the rank held on the date of retirement.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 4 May 18 for comment (Exhibit E), and the applicant replied on 10 May 18.  In his response, the applicant contends that while in the service he was a professional every day, not just during test time and not just after returning from Professional Military Education. He maintained a balance of being an airman, a father, a husband, a deacon and a man dedicated to country and community alike.  He desires recognition for the rank he achieved.  He is not seeking financial gain or back pay.  The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error and injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2STM and USAF/A1PP and find that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2017-04433 in Executive Session on 6 Jun 18

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 4 Oct 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	 AFPC/DP2STM Advisory opinion, w/atchs, dated 24 Jan 18.
Exhibit D:	 USAF/A1PP Advisory opinion, w/atch, dated 25 Apr 18.
Exhibit E:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 4 May 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9 pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2017-04433.