RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03007
	XXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His nonselections for promotion to the grade of major while 
assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) be removed.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He does not believe his record was thoroughly reviewed to 
determine if he should be promoted.

He was unaware that he was being considered for promotion while 
assigned to the IRR.

His post-board counseling revealed that he was most likely not 
promoted simply because he was in the IRR.

He believes his nonselections are unjust based on his active 
duty military record.  His record reflects that he served as an 
officer and all of his performance reports recommend promotion.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a letter of 
support from an air refueling vice wing commander; copies of his 
DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, issued in conjunction with his 14 Sep 09 resignation; 
Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) and a Letter of Evaluation 
(LOE) for the periods 14 Mar 05 through 20 Jun 09. 

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was considered, but not selected, for promotion to 
the grade of major by the Calendar Year 2011 (CY11) Line of the 
Air Force-Judge Advocate Nonparticipating Reserve Major 
Promotion Selection Board and the CY12 Line and Nonline 
Nonparticipating Reserve Major Promotion Selection Board that 
convened at HQ ARPC, 11 Apr 11 and 23 Jan 12, respectively.  
When considered by these boards, he was assigned to the 
Nonobligated Nonparticipating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS). 
The promotion quota for the Nonparticipating Reserve Major 
Promotion Selection Boards is one (1).

On 10 Feb 13, the applicant was discharged under the provisions 
of Title 10, United States Code 14505 and 14513 for two 
nonselections for promotion to the grade of major.  

________________________________________________________________

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/PB recommends denial, stating in part, that there were no 
errors in his record as it met the boards.  The applicant was 
discharged in accordance with current laws and regulations.  The 
applicant has provided no evidence that the board's 
recommendations were in any way unfair or unjust.

Although members in NNRPS are not in a participating status, IAW 
Title l0 USC, Section 14301, all officers on the Reserve Active 
Status List (RASL) must be considered for promotion when 
eligible.  An Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and a promotion 
convening letter were sent to all eligible officers in this 
status approximately 90 days prior to the board convening date 
using the address in Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS). 
The applicant's nonselect letter and attachment listing the 
effects of non-selection would have also been sent to this 
address. There is no record to verify the address in MilPDS at 
that time.  

A review of the applicant's Officer Selection Record (OSR) and 
OSB did not reveal any errors in the record at the time it was 
reviewed by each board.  No information was provided to either 
promotion board that would identify the applicant, or any other, 
meeting the board as in-the-promotion-zone or above-the-
promotion-zone.

Promotion is a competitive process.  Board members use the 
"Whole Person Concept" in reviewing the entire OSR.  The board 
considers job performance, as documented on OPRs, participation, 
professional qualities, job responsibility, leadership, specific 
achievements, decorations, and education.  A promotion board is 
the sole recommending authority, and no feedback is provided by 
the board to explain why a member is not recommended for 
selection to the next higher grade.

The complete PB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He disagrees with PB's statement that his nonselections for 
promotion were not unfair or unjust and requests the Board amend 
his military record.

While in the NNRPS, no information would have been provided to 
the promotion board.  He had no commanding officer to write 
OPRs.  He was not aware that he had a commanding officer until 
he was called up for an IRR Muster (Recall) at Offutt AFB, in 
Jul 12.

He was also unaware of receiving communication from ARPC until 
he was notified of his second nonselection and his Muster 
recall.  Nothing was ever sent to his home of record.  He did 
not know if information was sent to his last duty station or 
where it was sent, if at all.

If promotion boards are to use the Whole Person Concept, it 
failed to realize that since separating from active duty he has 
joined a law firm in which he will become a partner in January; 
that his current job responsibilities include multi-million 
dollar transactions and advising multimillion dollar businesses 
and business owners in all legal aspects; that he is a leader 
among his church where he serves as a vice chair of its Finance 
Committee; that he and his wife have started a family; that for 
a hobby he is an instructor at the local community college where 
he teaches business law and real estate law courses; and that he 
is a member of the local Kiwanis organization and the Lions Club 
organization.  None of these facts were considered by the 
promotion board or by HQ ARPC/PB in making its recommendation.

In support of his appeal, he provides a letter of support and 
recommendation from a former supervisor and electronic mail from 
his Member of Congress staff office.

The applicant’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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission, including the statements 
provided in his behalf, 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.  We note the applicant 
contends that he was not notified of his eligibility for 
promotion consideration to the grade of major and was not able 
to apprise the promotion board of his accomplishments.  However, 
in accordance with AFI 36-2504, Officer Promotion, Continuation 
and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force; 
Para 1.7 Eligible Officer, it is each officer’s responsibility 
to monitor his/her own eligibility for promotion and to ensure 
his/her records are correct prior to meeting a promotion board, 
not after.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence 
he was treated differently than other similarly situated 
officers we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.

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 Docket Number BC-
2013-03007 in Executive Session on 15 Apr 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Jun 13, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/PB, dated 19 Jul 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 13.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Sep 13, w/atchs.




                                   Panel Chair