RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03994 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Date of Rank (DOR) be changed from 1 Oct 07 to 11 Jul 06. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was promoted to first lieutenant (0-2) on 11 Jul 04 and his 
next promotion to captain (0-3) was projected for 11 Jul 06. He 
does not believe there is any reason for his DOR to be 7 Oct 07 
[sic]. He believes the Board should find it in the interest of 
justice to consider his request because it would be an injustice 
for him to have to earn the rank and time in grade back just 
because there was a typo. 

 

The applicant does not provide any supporting documentation. 

 

His complete submission is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve (AFR) 
in the grade of captain. 

 

The 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 was transferred from 
the Active Duty List (ADL) to the RASL on 29 Apr 06. He was not 
a member of the AFR on 1 May 05 when the FY06 Captain Promotion 
Board was convened. Therefore, since he was not a part of the 
Reserves, he is not eligible for promotion consideration with a 
USAFR DOR of 11 Jul 06. However, because he missed the 1 May 06, 
FY07 Reserve of the Air Force Captain Promotion Board, DPB will 
grant a special selection board (SSB) opportunity for that missed 


opportunity. If the applicant is selected, his DOR will be 1 Oct 
06. 

 

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 9 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

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 Reserve Personnel Center 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. 
However, we note and agree with ARPC/DPB decision to provide the 
applicant SSB consideration. Therefore, in the absence of evidence 
to the contrary, we find no 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-2011-03994 in Executive Session on 27 Mar 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 



 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Oct 11. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 21 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 11.