RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-02326 
 
  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NONE

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect the following:

	a. He be promoted to the grade of Major.

	b. He be awarded the Iraq Campaign Medal with Bronze Star – Administratively Corrected.

	c.  He be awarded the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFOUA w/2OLC) - Administratively Corrected.

	d.  He be awarded the Air Force Longevity Service Ribbon with second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFLSR w/2OLC) – Administratively Corrected AFLSR w/3OLC.

	e. He be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) - Administratively Corrected.

	f.  He be awarded the Nuclear Deterrence Operations Service Medal - Administratively Corrected.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is applying for Federal employment and would like his records corrected to reflect his highest grade achieved while serving in the military.  In addition, he would like his awards and decorations corrected to accurately reflect what he is authorized.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 5 Jan 98.

On 28 Feb 06, the applicant received an honorable discharge with credit for 8 years, 1 month, and 26 days of active service.

The applicant served in a non-participating active status in the Air Force Reserve (AFR) from 1 Mar 06 through 29 Feb 08, and in an inactive status from 1 Mar 08 until his discharge.

According to Reserve Order CJ-000666, dated 31 May 11, the applicant was honorably discharged, effective 11 May 11.

AFPC/DPTSA verified the applicant’s authorization of medals and ribbons and will administratively correct his records.
 
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by ARPC/PB, which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/PB recommends denying the applicant’s request to be promoted to the grade of Major.  The following timeline applies in the applicant’s case:

a.	The applicant was promoted to captain on 24 Dec 01 while on active duty.

b.	On 27 Jan 06, the applicant’s name was on the congressional record as being selected for promotion to major.

c.	On 28 Feb 06, the applicant separated from active duty and was appointed into the Air Force Reserve the next day, with no break in service.  The applicant’s projected date of rank (DOR) would have been 7 years from his DOR to captain:  24 Dec 08.

d.	On 1 Mar 08, the applicant was assigned to the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS).  This voided the officer’s pending promotion per AFI 36-2504, paragraph 2.4.5.

Air Force Instruction 36-2504, Officer Promotion, Continuation and Selective Early Removal in the Reserve of the Air Force, paragraph 6.4, states that an officer transferring from the Active Duty List to the Reserve Active Status List will receive the promotion under the Reserve of the Air Force timelines.  Paragraph 2.4.5 states, an officer’s promotion becomes void if a selected officer receives an assignment to ISLRS.  This is in accordance with Title 10, U.S.C., section 14317.  The applicant’s promotion was voided upon his assignment to ISLRS on 1 Mar 08, 9 months before his projected promotion.

To grant relief would be contrary to the criteria established by Title 10, U.S.C., section 14317.  However, if the Board did choose to grant the request, the Board could change the projected DOR to the day before the applicant’s ISLRS assignment.  This would give the applicant a DOR to major of 29 Feb 08.

A complete copy of the ARPC/PB evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He hopes the Board sees fit to grant his promotion to Major effective 29 Feb 08.  This promotion will allow him appropriate closure to a military career derailed by one of our Nation’s largest natural disasters, in a way that appropriately reflects his achievements and accomplishments while incurring no financial impact to the Air Force.

He would like the Board to accept the recommendation contained in the Air Force evaluation:

“...we recommend the Board consider taking the following actions: Change the projected DOR to the day before the applicant's ISLRS assignment. This will give the application [sic] a DOR to major of 29 February 2008.”

He notes that but for Hurricane Katrina, he would have had a highly successful active duty career.  He was decorated for service in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Hurricane Katrina relief operations.

His “Request for Separation - Waiver of 120-day Timeline,” was granted in response to the overwhelming stresses experienced by his family.  This waiver was highly unusual in that it granted a 365- to 180-day reduction in normal separation timelines, and was granted by two general officers in recognition of the unusual stress that his family was experiencing.

In addition, it was neither feasible nor reasonable to expect him to have noted errors in his record in the 36 months following transition to the Reserve, considering the overwhelming impact of that natural disaster on him and his family.  He had no record of notification of the date of transition to the ISLRS and was not briefed on the implications of this transition for promotion or other personnel programs.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, 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 not timely filed; however, given the circumstances of this case, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of ARPC/PB and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board considered changing the projected DOR as requested by the applicant in his rebuttal, based on the evaluation from ARPC/PB.  The Board notes that ARPC/PB actually recommended denying the applicant’s request, and the proposed remedy cited by the applicant was only a contingent recommendation in case the Board had determined to grant relief.  However, doing so in this close case would set a difficult precedent.  How could the Board distinguish the facts of this case from a subsequent case in which the requested relief might require only a slightly greater adjustment to a DOR?  Thus, the Board declines to depart from the policy on officer promotions and ISLRS and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-02326 in Executive Session on 15 Feb 18 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Jun 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/PB, dated 26 Sep 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Dec 16.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 3 Jan 17,
		       w/atchs.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), I hereby certify that a quorum was present at the Board’s deliberations and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings.