RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02172 

 

 COUNSEL: 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His date of rank (DOR) to the grade of captain be corrected 
from 1 Oct 07 to 1 Apr 06 (cancelled). 

 

2. By amendment, the applicant requests his DOR to the grade of 
captain be changed from 1 Oct 07 to 1 Oct 06; or in the 
alternative, to 1 Jan 07. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

In accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and 
Selective Continuation, he should have been considered for 
promotion to the grade of captain during the B-cycle, with 
promotion, effective 1 Apr 06 (amended to 1 Oct 06). 

 

Due to reduction in Force for communications officers, he was 
recruited as a combat rescue officer and selected by the 
reserves at the 306 RQS in April 2006. Unlike his previous 
commander his new commander supported his Palace Front 
application to be a Combat Rescue Officer; however, he remained 
on active duty until 30 Jun 2006, unaware this would preclude 
him from the active duty Captain’s board as well as the 
2006 Reserve Board. This appears to have unjustly precluded him 
from meeting the promotion board. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement; copies of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or 
Discharge from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 
30 Jun 06 discharge; his Air Force Reserve assignment order, 
RO A-110, dated 6 Jun 06, and an email from the Air Reserve 
Personnel Center Contact Center. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 


On 30 Jun 06, the applicant was discharged in the grade of 
lieutenant by reason of reduction in force, with service 
characterized as honorable. He was credited with 4 years and 
11 days of active duty service. On 1 Jul 06, the applicant was 
transferred to the Air Force Reserve. 

 

The applicant was promoted as a Reserve of the Air Force officer 
to the grade of captain with an effective date and Date of Rank 
(DOR) of 1 Oct 07. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial, stating, in part, that the 
applicant was not eligible to meet another captain process prior 
to his separation. 

 

The applicant was a first lieutenant with a date of rank (DOR) 
of 29 May 04. He was eligible for and met the Calendar Year 
2005B (CY05B) Captain Selection Process which closed out 
30 Jun 05. The applicant received a Do Not Promote (DNP) 
recommendation and was nonselected for promotion. Had the 
applicant been selected for promotion, he would have had a DOR 
to captain of 24 May 06. 

 

The applicant was eligible for the CY06B Captain Selection 
Process which closed out 30 Jun 06. On 27 May 06, the applicant 
became ineligible to meet the CY06B Captain process. The reason 
for his ineligibility was his nonselection for retention and 
mandatory Date of Separation (DOS) of 30 Jun 06. Had the 
applicant met the process and been selected above-the-promotion-
zone (APZ), the earliest DOR to captain that he could have was 
1 Jan 07. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Through counsel, the applicant notes that he voluntarily 
separated under the provisions of the force shaping program. 
IAW the applicable policies he could have separated as early as 
Apr 06 or Sept 06; however, when selecting his transition date, 
he attempted to balance his obligations to his active duty unit 
with his desire to be a combat rescue officer in the Air Force 
Reserve. 

 

He made the difficult choice to remain with his active duty unit 
because he was an absolutely crucial component to them being 
prepared for the Unit Compliance Inspection (UCI); so he chose 
to remain until 30 Jun 06, which supported his active duty unit 


and also allowed sufficient time for him to prepare for the 
Combat Rescue Officer selection course in Oct 06. 

 

The Military Personnel Flight Memorandum (MPFM) regarding the 
Force Shaping process did not contain guidance or information on 
how the force shaping boards would impact promotion eligibility. 

 

Neither he nor his supervisor was familiar with the Air Force 
Reserve promotion process nor did they realize the 30 Jun 
06 transfer date would make him ineligible for the active duty 
promotion process. He was never briefed on Air Force Reserve 
promotion policy and as a result of his transfer date to the Air 
Force Reserve, he was not promoted at the earliest possible 
date. His choice benefited the active duty and Air Force 
Reserve; however, his actions, his loyalty and selflessness were 
to his own detriment. He believes this is a clear injustice 
that should be corrected. 

 

The counsel’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

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

 

2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case and do not find it supports a determination 
that the applicant's DOR should be changed from 1 Oct 07 to 
1 Oct 06 or in the alternative, 1 Jan 07. Therefore, 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 the applicant has failed to sustain his 
burden of having suffered either an error or injustice. While 
the applicant’s promotion eligibility was impacted by the date 
he chose to transfer to the Air Force Reserve, the applicant 
contends he is the victim of injustice due to 1) the failure of 
the Air Force to provide guidance on how his transfer would 
affect his promotion eligibility and 2) he delayed his transfer 
in order to help his losing unit prepare for an UCI. The 
applicant has not provided evidence that shows effort on his 
part to determine the impact of his transfer to the Air Force 
Reserve. It would appear reasonable to this board that the 
applicant would have exercised due diligence to determine what 
impact his decision would have. While the applicant’s decision 
to assist his unit in preparation for an upcoming UCI is 
admirable, the applicant clearly indicates that it was his 


personal decision to do so. As such, we are not persuaded the 
applicant was treated differently from others similarly 
situated. While the date of the applicant’s transfer may have 
been adverse to the applicant, we find insufficient evidence to 
conclude that he has been the victim of error or injustice. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence showing that his DOR was 
established contrary to the provisions of the governing policy, 
we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material 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-2010-02172 in Executive Session on 28 February 2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Jun 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 19 Oct 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Counsel, dated 24 May 11, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair