RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05699
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. Her date of appointment be adjusted from 26 September 2010
to 15 December 2010.
2. Her appointment grade to second lieutenant be adjusted
accordingly to include an earlier promotion to captain.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She earned her Masters Degree on 14 December 2010; two months
following the date her commission was granted. This did not
allow her to earn constructive service credit for her advanced
education. Adjusting her service date by two months will allow
her to earn credit for an earlier promotion to captain.
In support of the appeal, the applicant provides her transcripts
and NGB 337, Oaths of Office.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a member of the Air National Guard serving in
the grade of first lieutenant (O-2E).
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PO recommends denial. Service date and grade computations
are done when NGB/A1PO approves an individual for appointment
into the Air National Guard. Service credit for college degrees
is awarded only for completed degrees. The applicant would have
been advised at the time she received her approval letter of her
appointment grade and service dates and would have been aware
that she was not awarded credit for her Masters Degree. She
chose to apply for appointment and be sworn in prior to
completing her degree. While the timing of her date of
appointment into the Air National Guard is unfortunate, this is
not sufficient justification to change an appointment grade and
date of appointment for an officers appointment that was
approved over two years ago.
The complete NGB/A1PO evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 17 January 2014, for review and comment within
30 days (Exhibit D). 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice
of the applicants 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 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-2013-05699 in Executive Session on 3 July 2014 under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PO, dated 9 Jan 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jan 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02457
The applicant was awarded service credit for his full-time work experience from 22 Jan 07 until the date that he was approved for appointment on 24 Jul 08 in accordance with AFI 36-2005, Table 2.5, Rule 41. However, in view of the fact that credit is only awarded for full-time work in a qualifying specialty, and he has provided evidence indicating that he began such work on 11 Aug 06, we believe the appropriate remedy in this case would be to award him credit for the period 11 Aug 06...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2009-03038
In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of her original MSD extension request and correspondence related to the matter under review. On 15 Dec 08, NGB/A1POE recommended approval; however, the ANG Chief of Chaplains (NGB/HC) subsequently recommended denial, indicating the applicant’s retention was not in the best interests of the Air Force. However, inasmuch as the Board lacks the authority to reinstate applicants into the ANG, we believe the proper and fitting relief in...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05761
While he was not a member of the NVANG for a year prior to the suspense for being submitted for promotion, he had been on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL) continuously since he was commissioned in 2008 and therefore should have been recommended for promotion during the Calendar Year 2011B (CY11B) Second Half Captain Promotion Selection Board. However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicants complete submission, to include his rebuttal response, we are not...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05761
While he was not a member of the NVANG for a year prior to the suspense for being submitted for promotion, he had been on the Reserve Active Status List (RASL) continuously since he was commissioned in 2008 and therefore should have been recommended for promotion during the Calendar Year 2011B (CY11B) Second Half Captain Promotion Selection Board. However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicants complete submission, to include his rebuttal response, we are not...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04714
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of her enlistment, she had enough college credits to enlist in the grade of A1C. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PO recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05251
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05251 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Change her date of separation from the Regular Air Force from 11 May 13 to 19 Jun 13 to eliminate her break-in-service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03196
If the promotion recommendation had been received in a timely manner her name would have been submitted to the Aug 12, Position Vacancy List approved by Secretary of Defense on 5 Nov 12. The applicant was originally boarded for promotion on 14 Jul 12; however, her promotion was not submitted to NGB/A1PO in a timely manner due to an administrative error. If NGB/A1PO had received the original promotion request, they would have promoted the applicant with a DOR of 14 Jul 12 and a Promotion...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04134
AFI 36- 320, Paragraph 3.13.2.1.1, actually states Member may be discharged when the member has accumulated nine or more unexcused absences from UTA within a 12-month period. The documents provided indicate the applicant was given a three month leave of absence (LOA) in March of 1997 to attend to personal business and, was due to return to UTAs in July 1997. The AFI states a member may be discharged and does not state the member must be discharged. We took notice of the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03599
On 10 Oct 12, the applicant was originally considered for promotion to the grade of major; however, due to an administrative error, his selection for promotion was not processed through NGB in a timely manner. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show a Date of Rank (DOR) in the grade of major (0-4) of 10 Oct 12 rather than 12 Jan 13...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00038
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, a copy of her NCOA Certificate of Completion, medical documentation reflecting surgery admission, a Fitness Monitor letter certifying fitness compliance, a letter of support from her commanders, electronic communication concerning National Guard Bureau guidance, and excerpts from the unit manning document. In addition, the applicant has failed to provide documentation showing she was the sole occupant of a master...