RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02764
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant
colonel by the Lieutenant Colonel 1974 and 1975 [Fiscal Years
1975 and 1976 (FY75 & FY76] Reserve Officer Personnel Act (ROPA)
of 1954 promotion boards.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
1. As a result of an Air Force administrative error, he was not
identified to the 1974 and 1975 ROPA promotion boards. Instead,
he was supposed to be considered by the 1976 promotion board;
however, that never happened because he retired from the Air
Force on 31 Jul 75.
2. He is an 80 year old Air Force retiree with 21 years of
active service and would like this situation resolved before he
retires to his God.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air
Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in
this Record of Proceedings.
________________________________________________________________
_
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/CV recommends the applicant be considered by a Special
Board in lieu of the FY75 Lt Col promotion board and if not
selected, by the FY76 Lt Col promotion board. The applicants
promotion service date of 12 Jun 68 and total years of service
date of 12 Jun 1954 made him eligible for the FY75 Reserve of
the Air Force Lt Col Promotion board that convened on 13 May 74.
However, he was assigned to the Inactive Status List Reserve
Section (ISLRS), which rendered him ineligible for promotion
consideration. His assignment to the ISLRS was later revoked,
making him retroactively eligible for promotion consideration.
AFPC/PB can obtain select and non-select lists from The National
Archives and reconstruct benchmark records to conduct SBs for
these years. At the time of the 1976 promotion board, the
applicant had already retired and was not eligible for promotion
consideration.
Under ROPA there was no authority that existed for an appeal
board such as a special selection board (SSB) that exists today.
Further, the applicants application is not timely; however, in
a letter addressed to ARPC/DPB, dated 19 Mar 12, he indicates he
recently was working on old files, and came across the ARPC
Form 0-183 (10 Feb 76) showing he missed the promotion
opportunities. Although, he received the form in 1976, he only
recently became aware of its impact.
The complete ARPC/CV evaluation is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 28 Aug 12 for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, this office has received no response.
________________________________________________________________
_
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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. In this
respect, based on the evidence of record and the recommendation
provided by the Vice Commander of the Air Force Reserve
Personnel Center (ARPC), we believe that when the applicants
assignment to ISLRS was revoked he should have been
retroactively considered for promotion to the grade of
lieutenant colonel by the FY75 Reserve of the Air Force
Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Board, and if necessary, the FY76
Board. However, since he had already retired from the Air Force
Reserve and there was no authority to request an appeal board at
that time, he was not retroactively considered for promotion.
Consequently, we agree with the ARPC opinion and recommendation
to provide retroactive promotion consideration. Therefore, we
recommend that the records be corrected as indicated below.
________________________________________________________________
_
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that his record
be considered for promotion by a Special Board (SB)for the
Fiscal Year 1975 Reserve of the Air Force Lieutenant Colonel
Promotion Board.
It is further recommended that if he is not selected for
promotion, his record be considered by an SB for the Fiscal Year
1976 Reserve of the Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Promotion
Board.
________________________________________________________________
_
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-02764 in Executive Session on 14 Feb 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jun 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/CV, dated 16 Aug 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Aug 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 04553
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04553 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His record be further corrected to account for his denied promotion opportunities to lieutenant colonel and colonel, in that he was not considered by promotion board for which he would have been eligible had he been accessed in the correct rank. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00200
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Although he qualified for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel, while serving in the active reserve, his rank of major was “temporarily frozen”. 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 it’s rationale as the basis for our...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04565
________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/CV did not make a recommendation and states that the applicant has never met a USAFR promotion board and recommended a referral to AFPC to comment on the promotion deferrals. The applicant did not meet any promotion boards during the time he served in the USAFR. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 04613
On 27 Mar 12, the AFRICOMs military personnel branch informed the applicant that ARPC/PBP determined his PRF was not considered by the CY11 Lt Col Reserve Promotion Board and of their actions to ensure the officer selection records of all eligible reserves are complete prior to promotion consideration. Therefore, we believe it appropriate to recommend that the OPR be corrected to reflect that the applicant acknowledged its receipt on 12 Jun 11, which will result in its inclusion in the...
AF | BCMR | CY1994 | BC 1994 02998
The AFBCMR issued AFBCMR Directive 94-02998 (Corrected Copy), dated 17 Jan 96, directing the two contested OPRs be declared void and removed from her records; her records be corrected to show she was not released from her AGR position on 12 Jul 91, but continued to serve until 11 May 94, at which point she would have attained 20 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS); on 12 May 94, she was released from her AGR tour and transferred to the Reserve; and, her corrected records...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-1994-02998
The AFBCMR issued AFBCMR Directive 94-02998 (Corrected Copy), dated 17 Jan 96, directing the two contested OPRs be declared void and removed from her records; her records be corrected to show she was not released from her AGR position on 12 Jul 91, but continued to serve until 11 May 94, at which point she would have attained 20 years of total active federal military service (TAFMS); on 12 May 94, she was released from her AGR tour and transferred to the Reserve; and, her corrected records...
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 | CY1981 | BC 1981 01237
As he was considered and denied promotion to lieutenant colonel (Lt Col) by selection boards in 1974, 1975, and 1976, he submitted a second application requesting his non-selects to Lt Col be set aside, his DOR to major be changed to its former date of 24 Feb 71, and his Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) for the period ending 31 Jul 75 be changed to reflect a more favorable review by the Indorsing Official. Notwithstanding the previous reconsiderations for promotion the applicant had been...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02600
His time retained in the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS) from 19 Aug 96 to 30 Sep 02 be removed in order to adjust his mandatory separation date (MSD) of 1 Dec 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPTT recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. As a result, he would...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His Total Federal Commissioned Service Date (TFCSD), Total Years Service Date (TYSD), Pay Date, and Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) are in error. With his five years in the active Air Force, he had almost eighteen years of military service when he was informed in Jan 00, that he would be discharged immediately. There was no evidence that the applicant was informed by ARPC of the implications of his...