RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00565
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive Commander's Responsibility Pay (CRP) for the period 28 October 2005 through 31 May 2007.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Due to no fault of his own or his organization, the 3rd Special Operations Squadron (SOS) which he commanded from its inception) was not originally on the CRP authorization list because it was not formally established until 28 October 2005. He qualified in all other ways for CRP, per establishment of the program on 6 June 2002. He and members of his squadron performed all requested actions to certify/establish this entitlement, yet due to no fault of his own, it did not take effect.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of colonel having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 June 2008.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial. DPSIMC states the applicant assumed command of the 3rd SOS on 28 October 2005, in the rank of lieutenant colonel. His G-Series orders were approved on 25 January 2006. In January 2006 he began to correspond with his military personnel flight (MPF) to have his CRP started. There is email traffic which documents attempts to have the pay established; however, no action was taken based on a phased termination of CRP. Some commanders were authorized to receive the pay until 30 September 2007, if they continued to serve as a commander past the 1 January 2007 termination date.
CRP was approved for implementation on 6 June 2002. When established it was only authorized for 10% of officers serving in a particular grade. CSAF approved a listing of squadron, group and wing commander positions that would receive CRP. The applicant's unit was not on this list. Termination of CRP was announced November 2006, and that no further requests for exception/addition to CRP eligibility would be entertained. It further announced that all current or pending requests were disapproved.
While DPSIMC can define the guidelines for eligibility for CRP, they cannot determine what new positions would have been placed on the approved listing for CRP.
The DPSIMC complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states the 3rd SOS/CC billet was not on the original 2002 CRP authorization list because at the time, the unit did not yet exist. Follow-ups to the original CRP request were unavoidably delayed as the servicing MPF repeatedly asked us to wait one or two pay cycles to verify that CRP had started.
In accordance with the intent of previous CRP message traffic, the 3rd SOS command billet should easily have qualified for CRP. The 3rd SOS was established as AFSOC's first unmanned aerial system (UAS) squadron, and as such was fully engaged in combat operations in support of the global war on terrorism. Two similar squadrons (319th SOS and the 73rd SOS) also stood up in approximately the same time frame, and according to the group commander, both of those squadron commanders received CRP. Likewise, the commanders of ACC's UAS squadrons received CRP while the program was active, including at least one who took command as late as May 2006 (15th RS).
The initial attempt to establish CRP was made in December 2005/January 2006, a minimum of 11 months prior to the November 2006 program termination message release, and nearly two years before the program ultimately concluded in September 2007.
The system failed an operations squadron and its commander at a time when they were rightly focused on effectively conducting combat operations in support of our nation's elite special operations forces and her allies.
The applicant's complete response, 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicants submission, we are of the opinion that relief is not warranted and the applicant has not provided any evidence which would lead us to believe otherwise. His contentions are duly noted; however, the detailed comments provided by the office of primary responsibility (OPR) adequately address these allegations. Therefore, we are in agreement with the comments and recommendation of the OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has not been the victim of either an error or injustice. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-00565 in Executive Session on 9 July 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Vice Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-00565 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 February 2009.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIMC, dated 15 April 2009.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 May 2009.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 May 2009, w/atchs.
Vice Chair
4
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01303
_________________________________________________________________ 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-2008-01040
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01040 INDEX CODE: 121.03 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Two days of travel be paid and one day of leave be restored. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01366
Her Letter of Reprimand (LOR), dated 8 July 2009, be expunged from her Officer Selection Record (OSR). The applicant filed an appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB); however, the ERAB was not convinced the report was unjust or inaccurate and denied her request for relief. The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants military service records, are contained in the evaluations by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility at Exhibits C...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02863
His active duty unit failed to provide timely and/or adequate career counseling or any Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS)/Personnel Concept III (PC-III) personal support while he was in TFAP. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C & D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02326
Current Air Force promotion policy, AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2, {sic – should be Rule 7} dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the PECD, and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. Although the Board is sympathetic to the applicant’s near-miss for promotion, evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00844
However, the applicant provided a Military Personnel Flight (MPF) certified copy of the same OPR with a correction to the close out date reflecting 2 June 2003. Regardless, either report (with a close out date of 2 June 2003 or 2 July 2003) was not required to be on file for the P0503A CSB. After reviewing the evidence of record, we note the applicant’s OSB did not reflect his current duty assignment at the time the board convened; however, evidence supports that his PRF, reviewed by the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04682
In the PRF for his 0309C promotion board, the applicants senior rater recommended that he not be promoted this board based on both the adultery and the violation of the no contact order. The commander included the information in the PRF before the LOR response was even due and also before, the investigation was completed. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice concerning the applicants requests to remove the Letter of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00122
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00122 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 July 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2005A Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CBS), with the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2009-03522
The applicant’s argument seems to be that since the Air Force ultimately paid his claim, he did nothing to warrant an LOR or a referral OPR. First, the applicant’s commander could have found that he committed fraud when he filed his original claim with the Air Force. Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Jul 10, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02393
His record be changed to show he accepted a Regular Air Force (RegAF) appointment from the calendar year 1990 (CY90) Regular Air Force Appointment Board and that he held a Regular commission when he was considered for promotion to major by the CY95A and CY96A Major Selection Boards. DPPPOO’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant disagrees with the HQ USAF/REAMO advisory and...