RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02902 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

She be reconsidered for promotion to the grade of major (0-4) by 
the Calendar Year 2011 (CY11) Line and Health Professions Major 
Promotion Vacancy (PV) Special Selection Board (SSB). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was eligible for PV promotion consideration and her commander 
nominated her; however, due to an administrative error by the 
military personnel section, her Promotion Recommendation Form 
(PRF) was not forwarded to the wing commander for his 
consideration/signature. She feels her chances of being selected 
were favorable based on her duty performance, education, and 
training. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of 
letters of support. 

 

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

Effective 22 Aug 11, the applicant was transferred to the Retired 
Reserve awaiting pay at age 60 in the grade of captain (0-3). 

 

The CY11 Line and Health Professions Major PV Selection Board 
convened on 31 Jan 11. The applicant was eligible, but not 
nominated for promotion consideration. 

 

Additional remaining relevant facts pertaining to this 
application are contained in the letter prepared by the 
appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

ARPC/DPB recommends denial. The applicant did not provide a 
written and signed PRF by her senior rater to support her PV 
nomination. Additionally, the letters of support do not address 
specifically what occurred and what remedies are in place to 
prevent this error from recurring. A letter from the individual 
responsible for processing the PRF would have better explained 
the error in this case. DPB notes that only a Special Board (SB) 
can be requested or granted in lieu of a PV promotion 
opportunity. 

 

The complete ARPC/DPB 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 16 Dec 11 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. In this 
respect, we note the letters of support provided by the 
applicant, to include her senior rater; however, the senior rater 
did not provide a written and signed PRF, supporting her 
nomination for a promotion vacancy. As such, we agree with the 
opinion and recommendation of the Reserve of the Air Force 
Selection Board Secretariat 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 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-2011-02902 in Executive Session on 23 Feb 12 and 13 Jul 
12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jun 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 17 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Dec 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair