Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01330
Original file (BC-2007-01330.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01330
            INDEX CODE:  131.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  1 NOVEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Date of Rank (DOR) to the grade of  master  sergeant  (E-7)  be  changed
from 1 Apr 07 to 1 Jan 07.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His unit failed to properly process a change of assignment moving him to  an
E-7 billet.  The request was started by his unit on   20  Dec  06,  and  the
process was not completed by the Assignments section at ARPC  until  28  Mar
07.  The lapse in processing the assignment change caused him to miss up  to
three promotion opportunities.

His unit had intended to promote him  on  1  Jan  07  as  a  result  of  his
selection as IMA NCO of the Year for Air Force Reserve Intelligence.

In support of his request, applicant provided  his  personal  statement,  an
internal move assignment sheet, SURF, and a printout from RMVS.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve.   He  was  promoted
to the grade of E-7, with an effective date and date of rank (DOR) of 1  Apr
07.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPB recommends the application be denied and states 1 Apr 07 is  the
earliest DOR for which the applicant qualifies.  His name was added  to  the
Mar 07 eligibility roster after the  suspense  date  (he  actually  met  the
eligibility requirements for a 1 May  07  DOR  because  the  nomination  was
received after the suspense date).  He did  not  meet  all  the  eligibility
requirements (fill  a  higher  graded  position  and  be  nominated  by  his
supervisor) until the  cutoff  date  (20  Mar  07)  for  a  1  Apr  07  DOR.
Backdating the assignment action does not make the  applicant  eligible  for
promotion any earlier than he was  promoted.   He  was  not  placed  in  the
position or nominated for promotion until the final actions of 27 Mar 07.

HQ ARPC/DPB sent the Jan 07 promotion  eligibility  roster  to  the  Program
Managers (PM) during the first week of Nov 06 with a  suspense  date  of  20
Dec 06 for promotions effective 1 Jan 07.  The applicant states his unit  of
assignment started paperwork to reassign him to a higher graded position  on
20 Dec 06; however, the reassignment request had  to  be  forwarded  to  the
MAJCOM PM (Detachment 6  [Det6])  for  coordination/approval.   He  was  not
nominated for the promotion on the Jan 07 roster.

On 23 Mar 07, Det 6 PM requested HQ ARPC/DPAAB reassign the  applicant  from
his current position to a higher graded position.  The PM also  requested  a
backdated Effective Date of Change of Strength Accountability (EDCSA)  to  1
Jan  07  because  the  member  was  “pending  promotion.”   On  27  Mar  07,
ARPC/DPAAB updated MilPDS to reflect the new position number, with an  EDCSA
of 1 Jan 07.  Although past the normal suspense date, his  name  was  placed
on  the  Mar  07  promotion  eligibility  roster,  to   get   the   required
recommendation  for  promotion  by   his   supervisor.    His   supervisor’s
recommendation was received at ARPC on 27 Mar.

The ARPC/DPB complete evaluation, with attachments is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on  8  Jun
07 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 the  rationale  expressed  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 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-2007-
01330 in Executive Session on 21 August 2007, under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
      Mr. Steven A. Cantrell, Member

The following documentary evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number  BC-2007-
01330 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Apr 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 4 Jun 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jun 07.




                                             LAURENCE M. GRONER
                                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | 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-2005-01303

    Original file (BC-2005-01303.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of her selection to major in Apr 01, her active duty supervisor was not informed by the 12 MSS/DPMPEP (officer promotions) or by the AFPC/CCR (Reserve Advisor) that he could accelerate her promotion in accordance with AFI 36-2504, paragraph 6.5. The also noted the applicant’s statement she was notified of promotion by her supervisor on 17 Apr 01. According to ARPC/DPB, information...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00351

    Original file (BC-2008-00351.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ ARPC/DPB recommends denial of the applicant's request for appeal board in lieu of consideration by the FY08 Lt Col Position Vacancy (PV) promotion board; however, they recommend adjusting his date of separation from active duty to 28 Feb 07, allowing his active duty promotion to transfer to the USAFR. DPB states the applicant has not provided any indication that his senior rater supports and desires...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01058

    Original file (BC-2003-01058.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ 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. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that he meets the eligibility requirements for promotion consideration by the FY04 PV board. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200868

    Original file (0200868.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00868 INDEX CODE: 102.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he was promoted to the grade of captain on 2 Apr 51, to the grade of major on 19 Apr 55, and to the grade of lieutenant colonel on 1 Jul 62. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03068

    Original file (BC-2005-03068.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s nomination package for the FY06 LTC PV Selection Board was received by HQ ARPC on 29 Apr 05. Review of the nomination package determined the applicant did not meet one of the criteria for PV consideration, i.e., having at least 50 credit points for a year of satisfactory federal service during the last full R/R year. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001994

    Original file (0001994.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Promotion Board Secretariat, HQ ARPC/DPB, stated that the applicant provided a copy of the mandatory [in- and above-the- promotion zone (I/APZ)] and Position Vacancy (PV) date of rank (DOR) requirements for the 99 March Chaplains Captain Selection Board. As DPB previously stated, HQ ARPC/HC provided a letter attesting that the IMA chaplains did not have any PV quotas available for the FY00 Captains...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02873

    Original file (BC-2006-02873.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Had he been selected for promotion by this Board, he would have a DOR of 7 April 2006. When the error was realized, the ANG promoted him via Position Vacancy (PV) and recommended he apply to this Board to have his DOR and PED corrected to the earlier date. ______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was promoted to the Reserve...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01320

    Original file (BC-2005-01320.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the effective date of his promotion to lieutenant colonel was delayed to 11 Sep 01, his date of rank (DOR) was back-dated to 6 Jun 01, within the OPR reporting period. The applicant contends that his nonselection for promotion to colonel by the FY05 colonel selection board was due to the fact his record as it met the board, only contained one OPR reflecting service in the grade of lieutenant colonel. After careful review of the applicant's submission and the available evidence of...