RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00337
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His non-selection for promotion to first lieutenant (O-2) be
revoked and that he receive rank and privileges for a 30-year
career.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The promotion board that considered him was influenced by some
contrived and erroneous Air Force Forms 1085, Reserve Officer
Training Performance Report. He would have given the Air Force
Reserve a full 30 years of participation had he not had a
particular Commanding Officer (CO) early in his career. He
believes he did qualify for rank(s) by virtue of his civilian
occupation and other qualifications.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement; and copies of an American Legion information document
on discharge dispute; Air Force Pamphlet 36-2607, Applicants
Guide to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records
(AFBCMR); military personnel and flight records; college diploma;
a civilian employment verification letter; and civilian flight
records.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
__________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Louisiana Air National
Guard (ANG) and United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) with prior
enlisted service in the United States Navy Reserve. On 28 January
1955 he was discharged from the ANG and entered active duty to
attend pilot training as an Aviation Cadet. On 11 May 1956,
following his completion of Basic Flying School, he was honorably
discharged from active duty and tendered an appointment as a
second lieutenant (O-1) in the Louisiana Air National Guard and as
a Reserve Officer of the Air Force effective 12 May 1956.
His Reserve Officer Training Performance Reports for the periods
12 May 1956 to 14 June 1957, and, 15 June 1957 to 31 December
1957, indicate the applicant was not considered promotional
material at this time on both reports as recommended by his
reporting official and concurred with by the indorsing official.
The record shows he was subsequently transferred from the ANG to
the USAFR effective 31 December 1957. He then applied for a
Category E, non-paid/points only USAFR position and obtained the
assignment effective 25 September 1958. He completed training for
a new career field and was awarded qualification in a secondary
Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) effective 23 April 1959. He never
returned to flying status while in the USAFR.
On 20 June 1960, the applicant was discharged from all
appointments based on his non-selection for promotion and the
expiration of his Military Service Obligation.
__________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:
ARPC/DPB recommends denial. DPB states that when the review board
considered the applicant for promotion, he held a rated AFSC, but
was not in a rated position, nor was he performing duty. It
wasnt until May 1959 that he became qualified in his second AFSC
and began performing in that capacity. The promotion review board
considered him as a pilot who was not participating in any duties
and who received below mid-range performance reports. When
examined for promotion by the second lieutenant (O-1) review
board, he was found not qualified to be promoted to the grade of
first lieutenant and was subsequently discharged. The fact that a
civilian airline hired him as a pilot and he had a successful
civilian career does not conversely apply to his military career.
The complete DPB evaluation is at Exhibit C.
__________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The two Air Force Forms 1085s he received from his rating chain
reflecting not recommended for promotion was an injustice to
both him and the Air Force. Had he not suffered such an
injustice, he would have had a successful career in the ANG/USAFR,
perhaps reaching the grade of brigadier general (O-7), as well as
having a very successful commercial airline career, as numerous
members have done.
The applicants complete rebuttal 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 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 an 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 the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
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 AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2011-00337 in Executive Session on 12 October 2011, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00337:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Dec 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 25 Mar 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Apr 11, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2000-02768A
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 24 October 2002, the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) considered applicant’s request that the Article 15 imposed on 16 February 1994, and the Officer Performance Report (OPR) closing 30 April 1998, be removed from his records and he be sent to a Replacement Training Unit (RTU) to be re-qualified and reinstated in an active status as an Air National Guard (ANG) fighter pilot in...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02883
Any and or all ANG and Army records damaged by the Revocation of Flying Order action be corrected. During this time, he received a negative OPR from his AFR unit. He was never informed his Flying Order would be permanently revoked, in fact, he was told by his former ANG commander that his record would not be damaged in any way should he be unable to return to Oklahoma for continuation of T-37 training with only one day’s notice.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02034
In February 2007, the applicant was considered but was not selected for promotion by the FY08 Reserve Major Promotion Board. She ended up meeting the promotion board in the same Category E position as the first board. DPB states there is no apparent error in her Officer Selection Record (OSR) that could result in Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration in lieu of either the FY07 or FY08 USAFR Major Promotion Boards.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01075
By transferring to the AFR one month before his date of eligibility, he was not included in the AFR promotion process in time to meet the promotion board to captain as would have been directed by ARPCM 02-21. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00284
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00284 INDEX CODE: 100.05 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 1 Aug 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered by the Calendar Year 2005 (CY05) Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Continuation Board with a Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) of 14N4 (Intelligence) rather than...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2005-01550
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01550 (Case 2) INDEX CODE: 131.00, 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 10 SEPTEMBER 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears he is requesting consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the FY05 United States Air Force Reserve...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01411
When applicant was subsequently promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the FY07 ANG Line and Non-line Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Board, he was considered by this board on-time and selected at his first eligibility. 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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01367
The CY2004 Lt Colonel Selective Continuation Board considered officers whose primary, duty, secondary, or tertiary Air Force Specialty (PAFSC, DAFSC, 2AFSC, 3AFSC) was manned at 95% or less. The applicant does not have a 3AFSC. As stated, the applicant made no effort prior to any promotion or continuation board to update his AFSCs or his Duty History to reflect what he states today is the correct information.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00169
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00169 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His second non-selection to the grade of major (O-4) be declared void and removed from his record, and he be granted a Special Selection Board (SSB) for consideration for promotion to O-4. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00050
An Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and a promotion letter were sent to all eligible officers in this status approximately 90 days prior to the board convening date. Based on the applicants submission, including the letters of support submitted in his behalf, we find it reasonable to believe the applicant was completely unaware of his promotion consideration during the FY01 Major Promotion Board, particularly since it appears he had not received any correspondence from the Air Force Reserve. ...