RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01945
		INDEX CODE:  131.04
 		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Dec 22, 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His promotion effective  date (PED)  be corrected  from 8 Jun 07 to 29 Mar 07.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His PED and date of rank (DOR) from the U0408A major’s board (FY08 Line and Health Professions Major Position Vacancy Promotion (PV) Selection Board, Feb 07) was based on completion of time in grade (TIG) of four years, public release date of the board results or the signature of the approval authority, whichever was later.

He surpassed four years TIG on 12 Jun 06.

The Secretary of Defense approval authority was granted on 22 Mar 07 and the established public release date was 29 Mar 07.  Based on these dates, his PED should match his DOR of 29 Mar 07.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of the Air Reserve Personnel Center memorandum (ARPCM 07-05) and e-mails regarding his promotion.
 
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the applicant’s records reflects he is currently serving as an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) in the grade of major.  His effective DOR is 29 Mar 07 and his promotion effective date is 8 Jun 07.

Other relevant facts are outlined in the Air Force advisory at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The applicant was considered and selected by the V0408A major board, the mandatory board, not the PV board.  Had he been selected by the PV board, his claim would be founded.  He actually received an accelerated promotion via AFI 36-2504, Officer Promotion Continuation and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, paragraph 6.5.  Except for the accelerated promotion request, his mandatory DOR and PED would have been 12 Jun 08.

The ARPC/DPB complete evaluation, with attachments is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 3 Jul 07 and 13 Aug 07 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has not received a response.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

An additional Air Force evaluation was required based on questions posed by the Board.  AFRPC/DPB determined the initial advisory was in error and prepared a corrected advisory.  

ARPC/DPB recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The approval for the applicant’s promotion was received on 6 Jun 07.  The applicant received the original DOR of 29 Mar 07, with an effective date of 8 Jun 07, allowing sufficient time to process the order for promotion.  The two-business day difference between date received and effective date of promotion is standard procedure for manually published promotion orders (policy guidelines contained in AFI 36-2504, paragraph 6.5.)  Grade and strength limitations were not met on that date.  The earliest date allowed would have been 6 Jun 07; however, using the 8 Jun 07 effective date for pay followed procedures already in place.  The officer did receive the DOR established for his PV promotion board (29 Mar 07), only the effective date was later to allow for strength limitations and authorization to hold the higher grade on active duty.

The ARPC/DPB complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 Aug 07 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has not received a response (Exhibit F).

_________________________________________________________________

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; 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 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 Docket Number BC-2007-01945 in Executive Session on 13 September 07 and 4 October 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered for BCMR Docket Number BC-2007-01945:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 12 Jun 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  ARPC/DPB Memorandum, w/atchs, dated 27 Jun 07.
    Exhibit D.  SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 3 Jul 07.
    Exhibit E.  ARPC/DPB Memorandum, dated 9 Aug 07.
    Exhibit F.  AFBCMR Letter, dated 13 Aug 07.