Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01058
Original file (BC-2003-01058.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01058
            INDEX CODE:  131.03
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for a Position Vacancy  (PV)  promotion  to  the  grade  of
major.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to a system failure to notify his wing of his promotion  eligibility,  a
Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) was not staffed and  forwarded  to  ARPC
prior to the 20 Dec 02 deadline.  Upon discovery of  the  situation,  a  PRF
was prepared and forwarded by his wing  commander  to  the  board,  but  was
rejected because of its tardiness.

In support of his request applicant provided a copy of  his  letter  to  the
board President, his Officer  Performance  Report  (OPR)  rendered  for  the
period 27 May 01 through 26 May 02, a copy  of  his  PRF  prepared  for  the
U0404A PV board, and a letter from HQ ARPC.  His complete  submission,  with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant, an Air Force Reserve officer,  is  currently  serving  on  active
duty as an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) in the grade of  captain,
having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 18 Jul 98.

He was nominated by his senior rater  for  promotion  consideration  by  the
FY04 Line  and  Health  Professions  Major  Position  Vacancy  Board,  which
convened at HQ ARPC on 3 Feb 03.  ARPC Memorandum 02-12,  dated  13  Aug  02
stipulated the deadline for submission of PRFs for PV consideration  was  20
Dec 02.  Applicant's PRF was received at HQ ARPC on 23 Jan 03.

_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial.  DPB states that requirements for submission  of
PV nominations were established and  published  four  months  prior  to  the
suspense date.   The  PRF  in  question  was  received  34  days  after  the
published suspense date, 11 days prior to the  convening  of  the  selection
board.  Adequate advanced notice was  provided  to  all  Military  Personnel
Flights so that nominations could be received by  the  established  suspense
date.  The DPB evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that he meets the eligibility  requirements  for  promotion
consideration by the FY04 PV board.  While he agrees with  the  comments  of
the DPB, applicant states that  the  root  cause  of  the  problem  is  that
Memorandum 02-12 states the "MPFs can identify eligible officers  using  the
'Reports Processing' menu  in  the  Promotion  Recommendation  and  In-board
Support Information Management System (PRISM)."  He has no record  of  being
listed  in  PRISM  as  promotion  eligible   despite   meeting   eligibility
requirements.  Because he was not identified as eligible in PRISM no  formal
notification of his promotion eligibility was  generated.   Upon  unofficial
notification,  his  PRF  was  staffed  as  quickly   as   possible.    Board
administrators stated that a late letter signed by the wing  commander  must
be forwarded with the  late  PRF  for  promotion  consideration.   The  late
letter was accomplished and forwarded with the PRF on 23 Jan  03.   However,
the PRF was returned due to its tardiness.  Applicant feels that he did  all
that was reasonably within  his  control  to  facilitate  consideration  for
promotion,  but  systems,  policies,   and   procedures   denied   him   the
opportunity.

In  support  of  his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,
additional copies of documents previously submitted, a  letter  he  received
from  ARPC/DPBA,  and  copies  of  email   communications.    His   complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice that  would  warrant  corrective  action.
In this respect, the eligibility criteria for consideration by the  FY04  PV
board specifies that the member must have a DOR of 30  Sep  99  or  earlier.
The applicant's DOR to captain is 18 Jul  98;  however,  his  name  did  not
appear on the list of eligible officers that was provided  to  his  Military
Personnel  Flight.   The  omission  was  not  discovered  until  after   the
established suspense date for submission  of  PRFs.   Once  discovered,  his
senior  rater  accomplished  a  PRF  and  forwarded  it  for  consideration.
Through no fault of his own, the applicant was not considered for  promotion
to the grade of major by the  FY04  PV  board  and  it  appears  that  every
reasonable effort was  made  to  ensure  his  PRF  was  made  available  for
consideration by the selection board in question.   Accordingly  it  is  our
opinion that he should receive consideration by Special Review  Board  (SRB)
for promotion to the grade of  major.   Therefore,  we  recommend  that  his
records be corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be considered for promotion to the grade of  major,  Air  Force
Reserve, by a Special Review Board (SRB), and his records  be  evaluated  in
comparison with the records of officers who were and were  not  selected  by
the Fiscal Year 2004 Air Force Reserve Major Position Vacancy Board, and  if
recommended for promotion by the SRB, the Air Force Board for Correction  of
Military  Records  be  advised  of  that  recommendation  at  the   earliest
practicable date so that  all  necessary  and  appropriate  actions  may  be
completed.

If he is not recommended for promotion by the SRB,  the  office  of  primary
responsibility advise him of the recommendation of the SRB.


_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  AFBCMR  Docket  Number  2003-
01058 in Executive Session on 3 Jun 03, under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Mr. George Franklin, Member
      Mrs. Carolyn J. Watkins-Taylor, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Feb 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 4 Apr 03.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Apr 03, w/atchs.



                             WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                             Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-01058



MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force
Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section
1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be considered for promotion to the grade of major,
Air Force Reserve, by a Special Review Board (SRB), and his records be
evaluated in comparison with the records of officers who were and were not
selected by the Fiscal Year 2004 Air Force Reserve Major Position Vacancy
Board, and if recommended for promotion by the SRB, the Air Force Board for
Correction of Military Records be advised of that recommendation at the
earliest practicable date so that all necessary and appropriate actions may
be completed.

      If he is not recommended for promotion by the SRB, the office of
primary responsibility advise him of the recommendation of the SRB.








  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00824

    Original file (BC-2003-00824.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In this regard, we noted the statement from the applicant’s flight commander to HQ ARPC, which the senior rater concurred with, indicating that the applicant’s position vacancy promotion recommendation form (PV PRF) package was completed in a timely manner, but for several reasons was not processed by the published suspense date, resulting in the applicant being denied an opportunity for promotion consideration. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01059

    Original file (BC-2003-01059.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that while it spells out the actual policy and requirements for submission of PV nominations, adequate advanced notice was in fact not received by her senior rater and in turn the nomination and PRF was not submitted in a timely manner. Providing her consideration...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01688

    Original file (BC-2004-01688.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The 624 RSG commander provides a supporting statement confirming she did submit the applicant for promotion but discovered, after the board results were released, that the package was never forwarded from 624 RSG/DPM to HQ ARPC. The applicant was date-of-rank (DOR) eligible for consideration by the FY05 Major PV selection board, but his name did not appear on the list of officers considered by this board. OLGA M. CRERAR Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2004-01688 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02641

    Original file (BC-2004-02641.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02641 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His position number (007130530) be changed to position number 00713050 and that be considered for a Position Vacancy (PV) promotion by a Special Review Board (SRB) for the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Reserve of the Air Force (ResAF)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-01559

    Original file (bc-2004-01559.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPB states the applicant was date of rank (DOR) eligible for consideration by the FY05 Major PV Selection Board. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be considered for promotion to the grade of major, Air Force Reserve, by a Special Review Board (SRB), and her records be evaluated in comparison with the records of officers who were and were not...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102181

    Original file (0102181.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In regards to the additional PME requirement, the applicant states that the policy was not in effect at the time of her promotion board and she should not be evaluated against a higher standard than her peers meeting the same board. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, to include the attached Promotion Recommendation Form, AF Form 709, be considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02185

    Original file (BC-2003-02185.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 2003-02185 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for a position vacancy (PV) promotion by a Special Review Board (SRB) for the Fiscal Year 2004A (FY04A) Reserve of the Air Force (ResAF) Major PV Board. He was not considered for a PV promotion by the FY04 board. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02866

    Original file (BC-2002-02866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the ARPC/DPB evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a response indicating that as a result of administrative corrections to his position, he now has all the requirements to meet a position vacancy board: time in grade, a valid lieutenant colonel position, and the intent to nominate. Based on the assumption that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03190

    Original file (BC-2004-03190.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPB recommends denial and states consideration for the Major PV Selection Board is based on the receipt of the AF Form 709. The applicant’s senior rater, the sole nomination authority for the PV Selection Board, has not submitted documentation to support either an original nomination, or express support for the appeal request. The original packet was completed and submitted to the MPF on time.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00791

    Original file (BC-2004-00791.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) did not reach the Selection Board Secretariat in time to be considered for promotion by the U0405A board. The applicant provided a letter from his senior rater dated 2 Feb 04 explaining why the PRF was prepared and submitted late. We find no evidence of an error in this case and after a thorough review of the applicant’s submission, we do not believe he has...