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
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,...
_________________________________________________________________ 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
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
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
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
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
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
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
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
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...