RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01667
		INDEX CODE:  131.04, 131.05

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Promotion Effective Date (PED) be changed to 22 November 2006, rather than 24 January 2007.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Applicant contends his PED is incorrect in that his commander recommended him for promotion to the grade of captain on 22 November 2006.  Through no fault of his own, the promotion list was not signed until 24 January 2007.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a letter of support from his commander, the pertinent promotion list and copies of his appointment paperwork.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 22 November 2002, the applicant was appointed in the New York Air National Guard (NYANG) in the Reserve grade of second lieutenant after having served approximately 14 years as an enlisted airman.  He has been progressively promoted to the grade of captain with a Date of Rank (DOR) and a PED of 24 January 2007.  He is currently serving with the NYANG and as of 17 September 2006, has almost 17 years of satisfactory service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial.  DPB states DOR and PED are established in accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2504, Officer Promotion, continuation and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, which states DOR and PED cannot be established sooner than the date the officer fulfills the required time in grade (TIG) for promotion, the date the approval authority signs the list of those recommended for promotion, or public release of the selection process, whichever is later.  DPB states the applicants name was forwarded along with all other first lieutenants who would meet the two-year TIG requirement during fiscal year (FY) 2007.  The approval authority signed the FY07 list and it was publicly released on 24 January 2007.  Therefore, 24 January 2007 is the earliest PED any captain-select received, if they were selected for FY07 promotion.  As all selectees were promoted at the same time and received the same DOR and PED as the applicant, he will not be at a disadvantage for future promotion as he and his peers will be eligible for promotion during the appropriate FY.

DPB’s complete 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 15 June 2007 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 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 in judging the merits of the case including his assertion his PED is incorrect due to an administrative delay during the promotion process; 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.  In our opinion, the reasoning behind his argument is erroneous and is contrary to established Air Force policy, which implements the law.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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-2007-01667 in Executive Session on 20 September 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 February 2007, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 6 June 2007.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 June 2007.