Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04097
Original file (BC-2003-04097.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-04097
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reconsidered for a position vacancy promotion to captain for the
Captain Promotion Board, Board ID U0503, which was held 4-6 June 2001.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During transfer from the Air National Guard to the Air Force  Reserves
on 15 February 2001, there  was  a  delay  in  records  being  updated
confirming eligibility and position.  During the above mentioned board
he was eligible for promotion  under  position  vacancy,  but  it  was
unknown since no one notified the CENTCOM J1 of  his  section  of  his
availability.  As his records indicate, he had 27 months TIG (time  in
grade) and was in good status when the board convened.   The  position
he was assigned to has  been  funded  since  1996  and  his  reporting
official notified him that he would have recommended him for promotion
at that time.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of his AF Form 709,
Promotion Recommendation, a copy of his Unit Manpower Document showing
position, paragraph,  and  line  number,  a  copy  of  AF  Form  1288,
Application for Ready Reserve Assignment, and a copy of Special  Order
(ANG) AM-146 transferring him to Central Command which  also  includes
the paragraph and line number assigned.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force  Reserves  in  the
grade of First Lieutenant.

The manning documents from January 2002 and September 2002 provided by
the applicant, verify that he was  placed  in  an  authorized,  funded
captain position in 2002, making him eligible for  the  U0303  captain
position vacancy selection board.  He  was,  in  fact,  nominated  and
selected by the U0303 board.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial.  The order assigning  the  officer  placed
him in a  non-funded  (pseudo  8)  position.   The  manning  documents
provided indicate the applicant was assigned to an authorized,  funded
captain position a year after the board in question.  There is nothing
in the applicant’s case to  indicate  an  authorized  funded  position
existed at the time of the U0302 board.

The order releasing the applicant from the ANG and assigning him to US
CENTCOM listed his position number as 88888888,  a  pseudo  assignment
when the position number is not known or not yet funded.

10 USC Section 14315 requires  a  nominated  officer  be  assigned  or
available to be assigned to a  higher  graded  position  in  the  same
competitive  category.   There  appears  to  have   been   no   valid,
authorized, funded position for the applicant to occupy.  AFI  36-2504
Chapter 2 requires the officer to be assigned to the position prior to
nomination.  If there is no position, a position vacancy nomination is
not authorized.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 December 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence  of
record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s records are in error
or that he has been the victim of an injustice.  His  contentions  are
noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed comments provided by  the
appropriate Air Force office  adequately  address  those  allegations.
Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or  injustice.   In  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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,  BC-
2003-04097, in Executive  Session  on  25  February  2004,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Charlie E. Williams, Jr., Member
                       Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Sep 02, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 18 Dec 03.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.




                             ROBERT S. BOYD
                             Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01082

    Original file (BC-2012-01082.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPB states, the applicant did not meet the requirement of occupying the nominated position on the PRF submission date, or before the board convened. In reference to #3(b), the letter states the PRF submission was 9 Dec 11. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we do not find the evidence presented sufficiently persuasive to recommend Special Board consideration.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102140

    Original file (0102140.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    It was not until the day the FY02 board convened that the senior rater was contacted directly by ARPC and notified that a memorandum had been required designating her as the “primary” to AF/XO position 39574. The Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that her ineligibility for a PV promotion was due to the 11th Wing not revising the Unit Manning Document (UMD)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102383

    Original file (0102383.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    We believe that the Air Force should have informed the applicant’s Reserve Program Manager that if the PRF was not received within 45 days of the convening of the selection board, the applicant would not be considered for promotion. ________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-02883

    Original file (BC-2004-02883.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his response, applicant provided a personal statement; a letter from his wing commander, and letter of certification from the military personnel flight. The attached AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), prepared for the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Line and Health Professions Lieutenant Colonel Position Vacancy (PV) Promotion Selection Board, was accepted for file on 21 April 2004. c. It is further recommended that his record, to include the attached AF Form 709,...

  • 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 | 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 | CY2002 | 0102443

    Original file (0102443.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. AFI 36-2504, Officer Promotion, Continuation, and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, paragraph 2.7.2.2 states: “The position must be authorized at a higher grade than the nominee’s current grade.” A further requirement is for the applicant’s nomination package to arrive at HQ ARPC/DPBA 45 days prior to the convening of the selection board (AFI 36-2406). MILMOD, or previously the Personnel Data System...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02489

    Original file (BC-2004-02489.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It is possible for an officer to be eligible to be assigned to a higher graded position, but a position does not exist. The applicant is not and was not, at the time of the selection board, eligible for promotion consideration. Before the board, during the board and now after public release of the board results, the applicant does not occupy a valid higher graded position.