RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02488
COUNSEL:
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His corrected records be provided special selection board (SSB) consideration in lieu of the CY 14 USAFR position vacancy (PV) lieutenant colonel (O-5) promotion selection board U0514A.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
A late notification of his promotion eligibility resulted in his promotion recommendation form (PRF) being accomplished late and missing the ARPC deadline for submission of PRFs nominating officers for the CY 14 USAFR O-5 PV promotion selection board (U0514A). Therefore, his records that met this board did not include his PRF because it was not submitted by his unit by the established suspense.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
During the matter in question, the applicant was serving in the United States Air Force Reserve in the grade of major (O-4).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/PB recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Promotion board convening notices are provided several months prior to the board. Specific to this case, the ARPC memorandum (ARPCM 14-03, dated 10 Jan 14), Board Convening Notice, released to all military personnel sections (MPS) in the Air Force, contained the requirements for promotion consideration, both mandatory and PV consideration. The memorandum clearly stipulated the deadline for submission of PRFs nominating officers for PV consideration as 25 Apr 14. If the PRF was not received by 25 Apr 14 (45 days prior to the board), the member technically was not eligible for consideration. Per SAF/GCI, the convening notice is a secretarial act in support of the secretarial process, and there is no additional waiver authority in AFI 36-2504, Promotion, Continuation and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, for PV PRFs; therefore, ARPC/PB is compelled to hold to the 25 Apr 14 due date for the 9 Jun 14 O-5 promotion selection board. Only SecAF can give authority to deviate from the 45 day suspense, and then the extension would be opened up to the entire AFR population for additional nomination opportunities.
A complete copy of the ARPC/PB 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 27 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicants 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While the fact that his unit missed the deadline for forwarding his record for promotion consideration in accordance with the guidance issued could constitute an error on the part of the Air Force, the documentation provided by the applicant is not sufficient for us to conclude that his predicament is the result of such an error, or that his commander intended to recommend him for promotion for the contested position vacancy board. In this respect, we note that the applicant has provided no documentation from his commander indicating that he was in fact recommended for promotion or confirming that errors on the part of unit personnel resulted in him not being properly recommended for promotion. While the applicant has provided email traffic from his career development section instructing him to pursue relief through this Board, the evidence provided is not sufficient for us to determine with certainty that he was or should have been recommended for promotion. Should the applicant provide such evidence, we would be willing to reconsider the matter based on new evidence. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
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-2014-02488 in Executive Session on 21 Apr 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02488 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Jun 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, ARPC/PB, dated 7 Jul 14 w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Oct 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01335
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to an administrative error, his Air Force unit and its Commanders Support Staff (CSS) did not submit his PRF to the promotion board by the suspense. Unlike the mandatory PRF, the PV PRF suspense is not an administrative suspense. The date established in the board convening notice is actually the date that triggers eligibility for the board. Furthermore, the letter from the applicants chain of command was significantly compelling as it indicates that errors...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02036
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Per SAF/GCI, the convening notice is a Secretarial act in support of the Secretarial process, and there is no additional waiver authority in accordance with AFI 36-2504, Promotion, Continuation and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, for PV PRFs. In this respect, we note the applicants senior rater provided a statement indicating that he submitted the applicants nomination for promotion to major,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04552
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04552 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) be incorporated into her records and she receives Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) Position Vacancy (PV) promotion to lieutenant colonel (O-5). Per para 2.7.2...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02870
__________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was eligible to meet the CY13 Line and Nonline Major Promotion Board and her senior rater intended to submit her AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation, to the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC). The applicant was not nominated by her senior rater for promotion consideration by this board until after public release of the board results (13 Mar 2013). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00824
In this regard, we noted the statement from the applicant’s flight commander to HQ ARPC, which the senior rater concurred with, indicating that the applicant’s position vacancy promotion recommendation form (PV PRF) package was completed in a timely manner, but for several reasons was not processed by the published suspense date, resulting in the applicant being denied an opportunity for promotion consideration. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01058
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to a system failure to notify his wing of his promotion eligibility, a Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) was not staffed and forwarded to ARPC prior to the 20 Dec 02 deadline. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that he meets the eligibility requirements for promotion consideration by the FY04 PV board. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03393
A health professions officer nominated for PV promotion must complete their PME by the PRF submission date, 45 days before the board convenes. We note that apparently in accordance with the established governing policy, the applicant’s nomination for a PV promotion was returned because she had not completed the appropriate level of professional military education (PME) at the time the PRF was submitted. In this respect, the Board notes that a health professions officer nominated for PV...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01082
DPB states, the applicant did not meet the requirement of occupying the nominated position on the PRF submission date, or before the board convened. In reference to #3(b), the letter states the PRF submission was 9 Dec 11. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we do not find the evidence presented sufficiently persuasive to recommend Special Board consideration.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01059
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that while it spells out the actual policy and requirements for submission of PV nominations, adequate advanced notice was in fact not received by her senior rater and in turn the nomination and PRF was not submitted in a timely manner. Providing her consideration...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03190
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPB recommends denial and states consideration for the Major PV Selection Board is based on the receipt of the AF Form 709. The applicant’s senior rater, the sole nomination authority for the PV Selection Board, has not submitted documentation to support either an original nomination, or express support for the appeal request. The original packet was completed and submitted to the MPF on time.