RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03850 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He be promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6). 2. His Date of Rank (DOR) be adjusted and he receive back pay. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His promotion has been unjustly held up. In Dec 09, he was informed that he was promoted and that his name would soon show up on a promotion roster. When another unit member was promoted before him, he began questioning what was going on. He and five other unit members were not given credit for one drill. He spoke with his supervisor, the orderly room, and a senior Air Reserve Technician, who told him the issue was being worked out through the command finance department. In the end, he was not given credit for the drill. His chain of command keeps telling him it is just a matter of time for the list to come out; however, he still has not been promoted. In support of his request, the applicant provides printouts from the virtual Military Personnel Flight (vMPF). The applicant’s submission, with attachments is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve (AFR) in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K recommends denial. A1K states the applicant was asked to provide substantiating supporting documentation; however, he did not have anything other than what had already been provided. A1K notes that in the Reserve, enlisted members are promoted IAW AFPD 36-25 and AFR Promotion Policy, which means he needed to be recommended by the assigned supervisor and approved by the promotion authority (commander). The applicant did not provide any supporting documentation that proves his DOR and promotion effective date (PED) should be adjusted. The AFRC/A1K 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 4 Mar 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 Force 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. 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-2010-03850 in Executive Session on 19 Jul 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Oct 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 3 Feb 11. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Mar 11.