RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01419
INDEX NUMBER: 131.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 Oct 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His date of rank (DOR) for his promotion to the grade of major be
adjusted from 6 May 02 to one commensurate with his peers who were
selected for major by the active duty Line of the Air Force board.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes his current DOR to the grade of major places him one-year
ahead of the 92 year group and may result in his receiving two
nonselections for promotion before he has sufficient years to be
selected for continuation for retirement. He was selected for
promotion to the grade of major while in the Reserves. He has
returned to active duty and has been put into three unjust
situations:
a. He is forced to compete for below-the-promotion-zone
(BTZ) promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel early and will
have three fewer years to professionally develop and become
competitive for promotion.
b. He is eliminated from eligibility for consideration for
Intermediate Development Education (IDE). His 2004 IDE package was
submitted as a “2d Look” package. Because of his DOR, his name did
not appear on the consideration list in 2005 when it should have been
his “last look.”
c. He is in jeopardy of not being eligible for selective
continuation if passed over twice.
If his DOR is adjusted to match his active duty peers, all three
injustices would be mitigated. The applicant indicates he
understands his service dates were properly calculated in accordance
with governing AFIs. His appeal highlights the unjust and
unintentional consequences of how the AFIs dictate service date
calculations in some circumstances.
In support of his appeal applicant provides an information brief with
pertinent areas highlighted.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty from the Air Force Reserves in the
grade of major on 15 Nov 03. Based on his inactive Reserve time, his
Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) was adjusted to
22 Aug 94. Based on his current DOR of 6 May 02, the applicant will
be eligible to be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant
colonel in-the-promotion-zone in calendar year 2006 (CY06).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial of the applicant’s request to adjust his
DOR. The applicant’s DOR was properly calculated under governing
policies and there are no provisions to adjust it. They recommend
that if the applicant is nonselected for promotion a second time, he
appeal to have the nonselection removed at that time, which would
allow him to meet his IPZ board the same as his active duty peers.
Title 10 U.S.C. authorizes the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF) to
consider officers for continuation on active duty. DoD Directive
1320.8, Continuation of Regular Commissioned Officers on Active Duty
and Reserve Commissioned Officers on the Reserve Active Status List,
states officers within six years of normal retirement shall normally
be continued and officers who are not within six years of normal
retirement may be continued. At the present time, the Air Force is
continuing all majors regardless of their total military service. It
has also been Air Force policy to continue officers who are on the
critical skills list, which the applicant is on.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
30 Jun 05 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response
has not been received.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim
of an error or injustice. Therefore, 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 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 Docket Number BC-2005-
01419 in Executive Session on 11 August 2005, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
Ms. Sue A. Lumpkins, Member
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 22 Jun 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jun 05.
MARILYN M. THOMAS
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03305
A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPPO provides an informational advisory without a recommendation, advising the applicant was considered but not selected by the CY93B major board. A complete copy of applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPO provides a technical advisory confirming the applicant’s DOR to captain was...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02894
Prior to entering active duty, applicant was advised, in a letter dated 29 Jan 03 that based on the current board schedules he would be eligible for promotion IPZ by the CY05A Lt Col board. Applicant cites DOD Instruction 1320.13, para 4.1 and Table E2.T1, for the proposition that he should have been required to meet the CY06 promotion board IPZ with his original Air Force Academy graduate year group rather than having been “accelerated” to meet a promotion board a year earlier. Title...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03840
On 14 Aug 02, the Board considered and denied an application pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 9 Jul 93 through 22 Aug 94 be declared void and removed from his records; his OPR rendered for the period 23 Aug 94 through 15 Jul 95 be declared void and removed from his records; his PRF prepared for consideration by the CY96A Central Major Selection Board be declared void and removed from his records; his PRF...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03389
His DOR was 1 July 1998, therefore he was considered on his first Air Force promotion board as above-the- promotion zone (APZ). Since the majority of officers are promoted during their primary zone and his primary zone promotion board was convened by the United States Navy which he was selected for 0-6, he requests AFPC recognize the fact that the only in primary promotion zone board for 0-6 was, in fact, the Naval Reserve Captain Line Selection Board. The AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01832
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not informed that had his DOS been 30 Apr 05, he would have been allowed to transfer his active duty promotion to the grade of major to the Air Force Reserve. The evidence of record indicates that although the applicant was selected for promotion to major prior to his separation from active duty and transfer to the Air Force Reserve, his name was not on an active duty list when the promotion...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03380
Applicant’s former commander states that he submitted the applicant for the decoration with the intention that it would be in his records for the CY05A board convening in July 2005; however, he was reassigned in March 2005 and lost oversight on the decoration approval process. For his promotion board, only 13% of the majors in his career field, who completed Air Command and Staff College (ACSC) by non-residence, and received a “promote” recommendation, were selected. MARILYN M. THOMAS Vice...
Air Force Regulation 36-89, Oct 77, stated eligibility criteria for promotion to captain as two years time in grade as a first lieutenant. A complete copy of the DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Appeals and SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed this application and noted that the applicant was selected for promotion by the CY97A (3 Feb 97) lieutenant colonel selection board. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02328
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 30 Nov 99, he separated from active duty and returned to active duty on 1 May 02 in the grade of captain. DPPPO states the applicant was selected for promotion to major by the CY97C Major Central Selection Board (CSB). The applicant was returned to active duty on 1 May 02 as a captain with a date of rank of 26 Aug 90.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02267
Applicant reentered active duty on 28 May 04 as a major with a DOR of 1 Oct 02. Officers who meet SSBs based on errors in their records or for boards they miss, if selected by the SSB, will receive a DOR retroactive to the date they would have been promoted had they been selected by the original board. The applicant pinned on major prior to entering active duty and should have known at that time when she would meet her lieutenant colonel boards.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2005-00161
In the commander’s statement of support, he attests to the applicant’s efforts to review and make appropriate changes to his records prior to the selection board and that the incomplete changes occurred after the correction attempts. JOE G. LINEBERGER Director Air Force Review Boards Agency AFBCMR BC-2005-00161 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,...