RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04595 COUNSEL: XXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion to the grade of major (O4) by a Special Selection Board (SSB). His 1 December 2014 separation be held in abeyance pending the results of the SSB consideration. By amendment, Exhibit E, an AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (OPR) (Lt thru Col), be rendered for the period 12 April 2010 through 11 April 2011 by Headquarters (HQ) North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD) - United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He honorably served for over twelve years and as a result of mismanagement of his career by his supervision at one duty station caused him to face separation. He was administratively attached to HQ NORAD-USNORTHCOM and his joint operational chain of command, primarily an Army infrastructure; Military District of Washington (MDW), failed to complete any necessary administrative matters to include officer performance reports (OPRs) on his behalf from 12 April 2010 until 1 December 2012. As a result, he received a second deferral for promotion to major, forcing him to face separation action. His assignment at MDW was wrought with a lack of administrative support or general knowledge of not only Air Force process, but the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) program and the Reserve in general. His first awareness of any deferral of promotion was when he received notification of his second deferral of promotion on 30 May 2014. He never received the first verbal notification by his immediate commander or a notification letter. If he had knowledge of the first deferral of promotion, he would not have faced separation on 1 December 2014. According to Air Force Personnel Command (AFPC), but for the administrative errors of his previous command, his record would have been complete with OPRs and he would not have been twice deferred or likely even once for promotion. He was assigned to the United States Central Command (USCENTCOM) in July 2013. His administrative command and supervisor were unsuccessful in making contact with his previous chain of command to resolve the issue regarding his unrated time period. Therefore, he was issued a gap report for the period covering the time his previous command refused to administratively document with OPRs. In addition, he received a participation waiver for fiscal year 2013 (FY13). However, given the significant OPR gap of almost three years, separation was imminent. He did not idly stand by and let this situation transpire. He engaged the situation and documented his actions by seeking assistance from his administrative chain of command and new chain of command. In both instances, colonels in the Air Force and Army could not find a resolution to his unfortunate situation. Therefore, he qualifies for a SSB. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he was commissioned in the Air Force Reserve on 29 May 2002. On 9 August 2005, Special Order A-377 indicates the applicant was appointed in the Air National Guard, effective 6 August 2005. On 12 October 2006, an AF IMT 77, was initiated for the period 1 June 2005 through 5 August 2006, indicating no report required according to AFI 36-2406, On 24 January 2007, according to the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS), the applicant was promoted to the grade of captain (O-3). On 20 April 2010, the applicant was relieved from assignment and honorably discharged from the ANG, effective 11 April 2010 and transferred to the USAFR. 17 May 2010, an AF IMT 1288, Application for Ready Reserve Assignment, was initiated approving the recommendation of the applicant into the Air Force Reserve at Fort McNair. On 30 May 2012, the applicant requested a transfer to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR). On 11 September 2012, Reserve Order A-1130 indicates the applicant was relieved from assignment at the United States Northern Command, Fort McNair, District of Columbia (DC) due to conflict with civilian employment and assigned to Headquarters (HQ) Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC), Non-obligated Non-participating Ready Personnel Section (NNRPS). On 14 January 2013, according to ARPC/PB, the applicant was considered and non-selected by the Calendar Year 2013 (CY13) United States Air Force Reserve (USAFR) Non-Participating Reserve (NPR) major promotion selection board. On 3 July 2013, Reserve Order DA-00931 indicates the applicant was relieved from assignment at HQ ARPC/NNRPS and volunteered for reassignment to USCENTCOM as an IMA, effective 28 June 2013. According to ARPC/DPTAR, a Board Discrepancy Report for Board V0414A indicates the applicant’s unit and/or he was contacted to obtain his missing last OPR, missing orders and citations of four Air Force Commendation Medals (AFCM), and to update the personnel database. As of 5 August 2009, the receipt of documents or update to the database had not occurred. On 13 January 2014, according to ARPC/PB, the applicant was considered and non-selected by the CY14 USAFR Participating Reserve (PR) major promotion selection board. On 30 May 2014, ARPC/DPTT notified the applicant of his second deferral for promotion and mandatory separation date (MSD), effective 1 December 2014. On 15 August 2014, the applicant was rendered an AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (OPR) (Lt thru Col), for the period 29 June 2013 thru 28 June 2014. On 24 September 2014, an AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, was initiated for the applicant showing an OPR was not available or required in accordance with AFI 36-2406, for the period of 6 August 2009 through 28 June 2013 On 13 November 2014, Reserve Order CB-11 indicated by direction of the President, the applicant was honorably discharged from all appointments in the United States Air Force at his MSD, effective 1 December 2014. 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: AFPC/PB recommends denial. In accordance with (IAW) United States Code (U.S.C) Title 10, Section 14505, Effect of failure selection for promotion; reserve captains of the Army, Air Force and Marine Corps and reserve lieutenants of the Navy and Section 14513, Separation for failure of selection of promotion, the applicant was discharged on 1 December 2014. The applicant stated he did not receive notice of the first deferral of promotion which occurred while assigned to the NNRPS. Also, IAW AFI 36-2504, Officer Promotion, Continuation and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, the ARPC commander notifies all non-participating candidates of their selection or non-selection for promotion. A notification letter is mailed to each candidate’s residence at public release. Confirmation cannot be made that the applicant’s mailing address was correct in the Military Personnel Data System, or if the applicant actually received the notification. However, release information, to include the select list, is posted to the Air Force Personnel Services website (MyPers) announcing promotion results. IAW AFI 36-2504, a SSB can be granted if there is an administrative error, a legal or material error, or based on a formal appeal. A review of the applicant’s officer selection record (OSR) did not reveal any errors in the record at the time it was reviewed by each board. The applicant’s officer selection record (OSR) at the time the board met had a closeout date of 5 August 2009. A record audit was completed several months prior to the board’s convening date, noting the discrepancies. The discrepancies, as well as, all information visible to the promotion board, were viewable to the applicant via electronic officer selection record (eOSR) on the virtual personnel center-guard reserve (vPC-GR) website. In accordance with AFI 36-2504, it is the eligible officer’s responsibility to monitor their own eligibility and ensure their selection record is correct and up-to-date before the convening of the selection board. Nevertheless, the applicant’s OSR contains an AF Form 77, documenting the gap period of 12 April 2010 through 11 April 2011. A determination cannot be made if an OPR was required IAW AFI 36-2406. It appears the applicant did meet the participation requirement for the period of 12 April 2010 through 11 April 2011; however, there is no way of verifying if the required 120 days of supervision was met. For the period of 12 April 2011 through 29 November 2012, an OPR was not required and the applicant did not obtain the required 16 participation points. The applicant was properly considered by both the CY13 USAFR NPR and CY14 USAFR PR major promotion selection boards. He was discharged IAW current laws and regulations. The applicant has provided no evidence that the boards acted contrary to law. In addition, the applicant did not submit an OPR with his application, which would verify an administrative error did exist in the record and thus warrant the SSB. A complete copy of the ARPC/PB evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Through counsel the argument is reiterated that there is no evidence the applicant received notification of the first deferral, as indicated by ARPC/PB. Without the notification, he would not have known of the deferral action in order to respond. Regardless, he and his program manager aggressively attempted to handle the absence of administrative support from his command. Even after his transfer to USCENTCOM, attempts were made to resolve his administrative issues. Although it is the eligible officer’s responsibility to monitor his/her own eligibility, the applicant was not sitting idly by and ignoring his eligibility. He was continuing to serve while using two separate chains of command to try and resolve these issues to no avail. He has provided ample evidence that the selection boards were contrary to law, the law that mandates the correction of records when an error or injustice exists. In this case, both exist. If an AF Form 707 is not generated for the period of 12 April 2010 through 11 April 2011, the gap report provided by USCENTCOM should be sufficient to covers this period and prove service during this time period for the purposes of consideration for a SSB. It would be an injustice if he was not considered before a SSB given the errors present in the notification of the deferral action and the gross neglect of the chain of command during the time period that created the gap. The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E. 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. The applicant’s complete submission, to include his rebuttal, was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted. However, his case has undergone an exhaustive review by the Air Force Office or primary responsibility and we do not find the applicant’s assertions or the documentation presented to be sufficient to overcome their assessment of the case. We are not persuaded that an OPR should be rendered for the period of 12 April 2010 through 11 April 2011 or that SSB consideration should be granted. In this respect, the applicant asserts his command failed to perform their basic administrative functions, causing a gap in his rating period, by not submitting a timely OPR on his behalf. He further believes he put forth due diligence to have an OPR filed in his records during this period. However, we note the applicant’s officer selection record contained a Letter or Evaluation documenting the contested reporting period; therefore, we do not find the applicant was treated differently than any other officers similarly situated when he was considered for promotion. The applicant further contends he was unaware he was facing his second deferral for promotion. Although confirmation cannot be made if he actually received notification through the postal service for his first deferred action, the fact remains that he is ultimately responsible to monitor his own eligibility and to ensure the accuracy of his selection record is correct. As such, it is unjustifiable for the Board to direct an OPR to be prepared for the requested period. Therefore, since no change will be made to the record, favorable consideration of request for SSB consideration to the grade of major is not warranted. Additionally, since submitting his application to the Board, the applicant has been honorably discharged. In view of the above and in the absence of persuasive 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 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-2014-04595 in Executive Session on 24 June 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04595 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 November 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/PB, dated 28 January 2015. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 February 2015. Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant's Counsel, dated 9 March 2015.