RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03104 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Date of Rank (DOR) be changed to 24 Jul 13 with a Promotion Effective Date (PED) of 5 Nov 13. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His vacancy promotion to Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) was inadvertently submitted to an incorrect organizational email address on 24 Jul 13. Due to this administrative error, the promotion package was not received. Had it been correctly submitted, it would have allowed for him to be on the August promotion vacancy list and the promotion would have been effective 5 Nov 13. Due to this delay, the current effective date of his Lt Col promotion was 14 Jul 14. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a letter of support from the Military Personnel Management Officer (MPMO) stating his lieutenant colonel promotion package was inadvertently submitted to an incorrect organizational email address. Had his promotion package been sent to the correct email address his name would have been added to the August 2013 Position Vacancy list and his promotion effective date would have been 5 Nov 13. The error was only discovered in January 2014 and was sent at that time to the correct office. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air National Guard in the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Under Special Order Number AP-266, dated 15 Jul 14, the applicant was extended Federal recognition and promoted to the grade of Lieutenant Colonel in the Mississippi Air National Guard, with a DOR of 3 Jan 14, and an effective DOR of 14 Jul 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PO recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant was approved for Position Vacancy (PV) promotion utilizing the 3 Jan 14, Federal Recognition Examining Board (FREB). ANG officers are mandated by law to be considered for promotion in accordance with (IAW) Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act (ROPMA), effective 1 Oct 96, prior to the officer obtaining seven years’ time in grade (TIG). However, at the request of The Adjutant General (TAG) ANG officers can be recommended for (PV) promotion in advance of their projected mandatory ROPMA date if the officer meets all eligibility requirements outlined in ANGI 36-2504, Federal Recognition Of Promotion In The Air National Guard (Ang) And As A Reserve Of The Air Force Below The Grade Of General Office, Dated 19 Aug 13, Chapter 3, and is found to be fully qualified for promotion by a FREB. Chapter 3 also specifies that PV promotions must be reserved for a very limited number of truly outstanding officers who have demonstrated potential for positions of increased responsibility. Officers will only be placed on a PV promotion list after NGB/A1PO has received a promotion request and a review of the officer’s promotion record to ensure the officer meets all the eligibility requirements outlined in paragraph 3.3. NGB/A1PO received the applicant’s promotion request on 3 Jan 14, containing a FREB dated 3 Jan 14. The applicant’s promotion record was reviewed by NGB/A1PO and he was placed on the ANG Feb 14 PV promotion list with a date of rank of 3 Jan 14 as identified on the FREB. In accordance with ANGI 36-2504, Chapter 1, FREBs are valid for a period of sixty days; therefore, an officer must be placed on a PV promotion list prior to the expiration of the sixty days. For PV promotions only, the officer’s DOR is the date in which the officer was found fully qualified for promotion by a FREB and the effective date of promotion is the date in which the Secretary of Defense approved the promotion list. A complete copy of the NGB/A1PO evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 Sep 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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 an 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. The Board acknowledges the intent of the applicant’s commander was to promote him through the vacancy promotion process in August 2013, however, we note the applicant was approved for Position Vacancy (PV) promotion utilizing the 3 Jan 14, Federal Recognition Examining Board (FREB). While the Board is not unsympathetic to the administrative error that appeared to occur with the initial processing of the applicant’s promotion package being inadvertently submitted to an incorrect organizational email address, therefore delaying his promotion, we do not believe that this administrative error on the part of the unit creates an automatic entitlement to promotion or that there was an error or injustice in the fact that the applicant’s promotion took longer than intended. Moreover, the Board exercises the authority of the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF), and the SecAF does not have the authority to retroactively establish the applicant’s effective date of rank to a date prior to the date on which the SECDEF approved his promotion without the applicant having first met and been selected by a valid promotion board. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-03104 in Executive Session on 27 October 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03104 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jul 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, NGB/A1PO, dated 21 Jul 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Sep 15.