RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00791
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for promotion to the grade of major by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Fiscal Year 2005 (U0405A) Line and Health Professions Major Position Vacancy (PV) Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) did not reach the Selection Board Secretariat in time to be considered for promotion by the U0405A board.  His PRF was signed by his senior rater on 2 Feb 04 but was not faxed to the board until 10 Feb 04.  The delay was due to administrative errors beyond his control and is unjust to him.  

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, a statement from his senior rater, and a copy of his PRF.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force, on 12 Sep 93.  He has been progressively promoted to the grade of captain, effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 99.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial.  DPB states the applicant was date of rank eligible for the U0405A PV board.  ARPCM 03-13, dated 15 Sep 03, clearly states all PV nominations (PRFs) were due to HQ ARPC not later than 26 Dec 03.  The ARPCM states that after 26 Dec 03, the eligibility listings will be edited and only those PRFs received represent a valid eligible for PV consideration.  All other officers are ineligible.  The applicant provided a letter from his senior rater dated 2 Feb 04 explaining why the PRF was prepared and submitted late.  The PRF was faxed to HQ ARPC on 10 Feb 04, 46 days after the suspense date and the day following the board convening.  The DPB evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that extenuating circumstances existed at both the wing and squadron levels that prevented timely submission of his PRF.  The established practice is for the wing to notify via email both the commander and the Air Reserve Technician (ART) of those eligible for promotion consideration.  However, the MPF only notified the commander.  The commander was experiencing email difficulties and was unable to retrieve messages and no action was taken until the situation became known during the January Unit Training Assembly.  They were informed that they had until the convening of the board to get the PRF to ARPC.  The PRF was prepared on 25 Jan 04.  Because of weather closings and delayed openings, the PRF was signed on 2 Feb 04.  In the wing commander's letter, he confirms the aforementioned and attests to the fact that the applicant was not responsible for the delay in his PRF reaching the board.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, memorandums from the wing commander, email communiqués, and a copy of his PRF.  His complete submission, with attachments, 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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We find no evidence of an error in this case and after a thorough review of the applicant’s submission, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice.  In this respect, the announcement of the upcoming promotion board and nomination suspense date was released in September 2003.  The established suspense date for PV nominations was 26 Dec 03.  The statements provided by the applicants rating chain are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that the circumstances described prevented them from submitting the nomination for the PV promotion in a timely manner.  Therefore, 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 has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2004-00791 in Executive Session on 16 Jun 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Feb 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 28 Apr 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Apr 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 20 May 04, w/atchs.