Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9404097A
Original file (9404097A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            ADDENDUM TO
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  85-03497
                                                  94-04097
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE


            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be promoted to the Reserve grade of lieutenant colonel,  effective
24 Apr 72; and, that she be provided the monetary benefits this matter
should generate at age 60.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She should have been promoted to the grade of lieutenant  colonel  the
first time she was considered.  The reason she was not was due to  the
apparent negligence on the part of the Air Reserve  Personnel  Center.
Specifically, it appears that the letter, dated, 6 Jun 69,  which  she
received from the Department of the Army, US Army Chemical Center  and
School, concerning her  completion  of  the  Chemical  Officer  Career
Extension Course, E-24, should have been handled as  a  recommendation
for promotion to the grade of  lieutenant  colonel  rather  than  just
annotated on her records.

In support of her appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement,
a letter from the Director, Air Force  Affairs,  and  other  documents
associated with the matter under review.

The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF THE CASE:

The applicant is a former Air Force Reserve officer who  was  assigned
to the Retired Reserve in the grade of major,  effective  20  Dec  73.
Reserve Order EK-2415, dated 15 Oct 73, indicated that  the  applicant
was a “Reserve member who completed a total of 20 years  of  honorable
service in the Armed Forces and is not serving under an  agreement  to
remain in the Ready Reserve for a stated  period.   Not  eligible  for
retired pay at age 60 under 10 USC 1331 (10 USC 8846).”  An  audit  of
the applicant’s  master  personnel  records  indicated  that  she  had
completed 14 years, 5 months, and  19  days  of  satisfactory  Federal
service as of 19 Dec 73.

On 16 Apr 86, the Board  considered  and  denied  an  application  for
correction of military records pertaining to the applicant,  in  which
she requested that she be promoted to the grade of lieutenant  colonel
effective upon her first consideration for promotion; and, that excess
points during her satisfactory years and  Extension  Course  Institute
(ECI) points earned after her  transfer  to  the  Retired  Reserve  be
credited towards other retirement years, giving  her  20  satisfactory
years toward retirement (see AFBCMR 85-03487, with Exhibits A  through
E).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Promotion   Secretariat   Division,   ARPC/DPJA,   reviewed   the
applicant’s most  recent  submission  and  indicated  that  they  have
determined that  no  new  evidence  of  any  injustice  or  error  was
substantiated.

A complete copy of the DPJA evaluation is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In her initial response, the applicant indicated that, in her opinion,
she was fully qualified for selection for promotion to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel the first time she was considered.  The grades  she
obtained in the ECI courses and the  general  evaluation  of  her,  as
indicated in the letter dated  6 Jun 69,  as  a  potential  lieutenant
colonel were favorable indicators.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit I.

Applicant also provided four subsequent responses, which are  attached
at Exhibit J

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In  earlier  findings,  we  determined  that  there  was  insufficient
evidence to warrant any corrective action concerning  the  applicant’s
request that she be  promoted  to  the  Reserve  grade  of  lieutenant
colonel.  We have reviewed the applicant’s most recent submissions and
find  them  insufficient  to  warrant  a  reversal  of  our   previous
determination in this case.  In this respect, we observe that officers
compete  for  promotion  under  the  whole  person   concept   whereby
professional military education is but one of many  factors  carefully
assessed  by  selection  boards.   In  addition,  an  officer  may  be
qualified, but in the  judgment  of  a  selection  board--vested  with
discretionary authority to make the selections--may not  be  the  best
qualified of those available  for  the  limited  number  of  promotion
vacancies.  No evidence has been presented  which  has  shown  to  our
satisfaction that the applicant’s record  was  improperly  constituted
when she was considered and nonselected for promotion to  the  Reserve
grade of lieutenant colonel by the original selection boards.  In view
of the above,  and  in  the  absence  of  clear-cut  evidence  to  the
contrary, her request that she be promoted to  the  Reserve  grade  of
lieutenant colonel, effective 24 Apr 72, and, that she be provided the
monetary benefits generated at age 60, is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 2 Mar 99, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael P. Higgins, Panel Chair
      Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
      Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit F.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Sep 94, w/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, ARPC/DPJA, dated 6 Dec 94.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 16 Jan 95.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, applicant, dated 23 Jan 95.
    Exhibit J.  Letters, applicant, dated 5 Jul 96, 12 Oct 96,
                6 Sep 97, and 19 Sep 97.




                                   MICHAEL P. HIGGINS
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1994-04097A

    Original file (BC-1994-04097A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF THE CASE: The applicant is a former Air Force Reserve officer who was assigned to the Retired Reserve in the grade of major, effective 20 Dec 73. A complete copy of the DPJA evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her initial response, the applicant indicated that,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9703256

    Original file (9703256.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ ARPC/DPJA, reviewed this application and states that at the present time, under the ROPMA, they do not have the authority to hold SSBs for PV promotions. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, to include the Field...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03256

    Original file (BC-1997-03256.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ ARPC/DPJA, reviewed this application and states that at the present time, under the ROPMA, they do not have the authority to hold SSBs for PV promotions. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, to include the Field...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9702137

    Original file (9702137.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter, dated 2 Nov 96, the applicant was notified that since she had been twice considered and not recommended for promotion, the law required that her active status as an officer in the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force be terminated not later than 15 Nov 96. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Promotions Branch,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-02137

    Original file (BC-1997-02137.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter, dated 2 Nov 96, the applicant was notified that since she had been twice considered and not recommended for promotion, the law required that her active status as an officer in the Air National Guard and as a Reserve of the Air Force be terminated not later than 15 Nov 96. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Promotions Branch,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1994 | BC 1994 02998

    Original file (BC 1994 02998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFBCMR issued AFBCMR Directive 94-02998 (Corrected Copy), dated 17 Jan 96, directing the two contested OPRs be declared void and removed from her records; her records be corrected to show she was not released from her AGR position on 12 Jul 91, but continued to serve until 11 May 94, at which point she would have attained 20 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS); on 12 May 94, she was released from her AGR tour and transferred to the Reserve; and, her corrected records...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-1994-02998

    Original file (BC-1994-02998.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFBCMR issued AFBCMR Directive 94-02998 (Corrected Copy), dated 17 Jan 96, directing the two contested OPRs be declared void and removed from her records; her records be corrected to show she was not released from her AGR position on 12 Jul 91, but continued to serve until 11 May 94, at which point she would have attained 20 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS); on 12 May 94, she was released from her AGR tour and transferred to the Reserve; and, her corrected records...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00070

    Original file (BC-2003-00070.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, he was not selected to the grade of colonel. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPEB notes the applicant has not provided a new PRF with supportive documentation from the senior rater and management level evaluation board as required. Also, to suggest that the policy prevented him from being promoted is not warranted as other AFIT attendees, who received training reports, have been promoted to the grade of colonel.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02371

    Original file (BC-2002-02371.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not selected by the FY00 Air Force Reserve Colonel Promotion Selection Board. According to ARPC/DPB, the applicant was considered and selected for promotion to the grade of colonel by the FY01 Air Force Reserve Colonel Promotion Selection Board. A review of the available evidence reveals that although the applicant was selected for promotion to the grade of colonel by the FY01 Air Force Reserve Colonel Promotion Selection Board, the Senate essentially withheld confirmation of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04007

    Original file (BC-2010-04007.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04007 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel. 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 Reserve office of primary...