RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05761 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to reflect he was promoted to the grade of captain (O-3), effective 19 Oct 12 and with a date of rank (DOR) of 23 May 12, instead of 19 Oct 12. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was due to be promoted to the grade of captain (O-3) on 23 May 12, but his unit mistakenly did not submit his package in time to be considered for the correct promotion board. His unit thought he had to be a member of the NVANG for one year before he could be promoted and, as a result, his promotion was delayed. While he was not a member of the NVANG for a year prior to the suspense for being submitted for promotion, he had been on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL) continuously since he was commissioned in 2008 and therefore should have been recommended for promotion during the Calendar Year 2011B (CY11B) Second Half Captain Promotion Selection Board. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _______________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 23 May 08, the applicant was commissioned into the Navy Reserve in the grade of ensign (O-1) and on 23 May 10, he was promoted to lieutenant junior grade (O-2). On 12 Oct 11, he was appointed a first lieutenant (O-2) in the Nevada Air National Guard (ANG), with a date of rank of 23 May 10. On 26 Oct 12, he was promoted to the grade of captain (O-3), effective 19 Oct 12. In accordance with ANGI 36-2504, Federal Recognition of Promotion in The Air National Guard (ANG) and as a Reserve of the Air Force Below the Grade of General Officer, paragraph 3.3.9, nominees must have been in an active commissioned status for a minimum of one year immediately preceding the promotion recommendation. The service must be continuous (without a break) and must not include any period assigned to the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS) or retired status. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PO recommends denial indicating the applicant missed the cutoff deadline to be considered for promotion in the CY11B promotion cycle. Based on the applicant’s DOR, he would have been eligible to be processed for promotion to captain on the CY11B Second Half Captain Promotion list; however, he missed the deadline of 1 Oct 11 because he was not appointed into the ANG until 12 Oct 11 and was therefore processed on the CY12A First Half Captain Promotion list. He was subsequently selected for promotion on this list and given the DOR of 19 Oct 12. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates that the error with his DOR is due to confusion within his unit as to the time requirements for submitting his promotion package. In an effort to correct this error, he contacted the Subject Matter Expert (SME) at the Officer Programs Management Office of the National Guard Bureau (NGB). The SME indicated that although he joined the NVANG on 12 Oct 11, 11 days past the submittal date of 1 Oct 11, his unit still had ample time to request his package be submitted for promotion consideration on the correct CY11B Second Half Captain Promotion list. The SME also stated that if his unit would have made the request, she would have likely recommended that his package be considered in the CY11B Second Half Captain Promotion list. He currently has a request for supplemental consideration for promotion pending. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. The applicant contends that due to an error on the part of his unit, he was not timely recommended for promotion, resulting in a delay in his promotion to the grade of captain (O-3). However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, to include his rebuttal response, we are not convinced the applicant’s unit erred when recommending him for promotion for the Calendar Year (CY) 2012B First Half Captain Promotion Selection Board. In this respect, we note the comments of NGB/A1PO indicating that in view of the fact the applicant was not appointed in the Air National Guard until after the deadline established for the submission of the applicant’s promotion package to the CY11B Second Half Captain Promotion Selection Board, there was no way the unit could have submitted his promotion recommendation to meet the CY11B Second Half Promotion Board as the applicant contends. While the applicant’s argument in response to the NGB/A1PO advisory seems to be that he was told by NGB that his unit could have submitted his recommendation after the 1 Oct 11 deadline, other than his own assertions, he has provided no documentary evidence that would indicate to us that this is indeed true. 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-2012-05761 in Executive Session on 1 Oct 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05761 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated, 7 Dec 12. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PO, dated 19 Dec 13, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jan 13. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Jan 13. Panel Chair