RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04015 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2010A (CY10A) Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Central Selection Board (CSB) with inclusion of his Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for the period 12 April 2009 through 15 January 2010, in his Officer Selection Record (OSR). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to a system malfunction with the 22nd Operations Group’s electronic performance report tracking system, numerous OPRs were deleted, to include his OPR closing 15 January 2010. The exclusion of this OPR in his OSR resulted in an incomplete evaluation of his potential for promotion. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a statement from his commander (Additional Rater) and a copy of the OPR closing 15 January 2010. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of major (O-4) with a date of rank of 1 May 2006. His Total Active Federal Military Service Date and Total Active Federal Commissioned Service Date is 29 May 2006. He has two non-selections to the grade of Lt Col by the CY10A and CY11A Lt Col CSBs. The following is a resume of the applicant’s performance reports: PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 12 Apr 97 (2Lt) Meets Standards (MS) 13 Feb 98 Training Report (TR) 23 Oct 98 (1Lt) TR PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 3 Mar 99 TR 23 Oct 99 MS 23 Oct 00 (Capt) MS 23 Oct 01 MS 20 Dec 01 TR 28 Jun 02 TR 23 Oct 02 MS 23 Oct 03 MS 23 Oct 04 MS 23 Oct 05 MS 23 Apr 06 MS 15 Apr 07 (Maj) MS 11 Apr 08 MS 12 Apr 09 MS 15 Jan 10 MS The remaining relevant facts extracted from the applicant service records are contained in the evaluations by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility at Exhibit B and C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID defers to DPSOO. DPSID indicates the applicant’s report closing 15 January 2010 is already in the applicant’s OSR and has been placed in the Automated Records Management System (ARMS). Therefore, no action is required by their office at this time. DPSID states although the OPR in question closed-out on 15 January 2010, in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36- 2406, Table 3.6, Note 1a, the report was not required to be in the applicant’s record until 60 days after the close-out date, or 16 March 2010. The CY10A Lt Col CSB convened on 8 March 2010 and the evaluators had not signed and finalized the report until 3 August 2010, after the board had convened. There are other officer’s in similar circumstances where the close-out date is similar; however, unless the OPR is processed with all signatures, the OPR cannot be placed into the member’s record. To allow the OPR to be included after the board convened would allow the applicant to have an advantage other officers are not afforded. If any OPRs are processed within 60 days of the promotion board, they will be processed and, if possible, placed in the record for consideration at the promotion board. DPSID indicates that if the Board should determine that any changes must be made to the OPR to make it eligible for an SSB (for instance backdating signature dates), the only recourse of action on the electronic (digitally signed) version of the OPR is to have the entire report reaccomplished in “wet signature” (printed and physically signed). Currently, each signature on the electronic form is tied to a certificate of authenticity; and when these forms are digitally signed, the date auto- populates and cannot be changed. Any attempts to make changes to a digitally signed form will potentially revoke the certificate of authenticity and render the document null and void. The complete DSID evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial. DPSOO states that the applicant’s OPR closing 15 January 2010 was not required to be in his OSR until 15 March 2010, which was after the 8 March 2010 board convening date. Furthermore, the dates on the report are also all after the convening of the board. This report not only closed after the start of the CSB, but the signature dates are also after the CSB. Therefore, the report could not be filed in his record regardless if it was or not processed in a timely manner. Allowing the inclusion of reports that were not required to be in the OSR to be the basis for SSB consideration would be unfair to other officers with similar circumstances. DPSOO indicates that eligible officers meeting an SSB have the option to submit a letter to the board president addressing any matter of record concerning themselves that they believe is important to their consideration for promotion. As such, the applicant could have written a letter to board members informing them of the accomplishments mentioned in his 15 January 2010 report. They have verified that he did not take these steps. The time to submit a letter is prior to convening of the original board, not after non-selection. DPSOO states that should the Board approve the relief sought, then they concur with DPSID’s recommendation to have the report reaccomplished in “wet signature.” The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL RATER’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The applicant’s commander (Additional Rater) provides a statement in response to the Air Force advisory opinions indicating the applicant’s OPR closing 15 January 2010 was not included for the CY10A Lt Col CSB due to a significant malfunction with their Wing’s electronic performance report tracking system. Numerous OPRs, including the applicant’s, were deleted and had to be reaccomplished due to this failure. However, no others had the catastrophic consequences that the loss of the applicant’s did. His intent and primary objective was to ensure this OPR was included in the applicant’s record for the CY10A Lt Col CSB. He painstakingly accomplished this OPR to accurately showcase the applicant’s continued exemplary performance. However, in this case, technology out of his or the applicant’s control failed and this OPR was not processed in time to be considered at the promotion board. He and the applicant both believed the OPR had been completed, processed, and met the board. Based on the system failure and belief at the time, that the OPR had been completed and met the board, the applicant never had logical reason to write a letter to the board president. Given his intent and the reason behind the OPR not making it into the applicant’s record, the right thing to do now is to give the applicant a complete and fair evaluation through an SSB that considers his full record, including the OPR which closed-out on 15 January 2010. To pass on this opportunity to reevaluate the applicant’s complete record for promotion is an injustice to him, and may cost the Air Force a fantastic Lt Col. The additional rater’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 an injustice. After reviewing the complete evidence of record and noting the applicant’s assertions, we find it insufficient to justify granting the relief requested. In that regard, we note that an error has not occurred since the OPR in question was not required to be a matter of record prior to the convening of the CY10A Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB). Consequently, we considered whether the failure to make the OPR a matter of record for consideration by the CY10A Lieutenant Colonel CSB constitutes an injustice. In our view, it does not. While the applicant provides a statement of support from his group commander who was the additional rater on the OPR, we note that this Board has generally only approved these types of request under the most extraordinary of circumstances. In our view the evidence provided does not support granting an exception to how cases of this type are normally adjudicated. In that regard, we note that officer performance reports have varied closeout dates and that many applicants to the Board have felt it to be an injustice when they are considered for promotion without their most recent report. However, we believe it would be fundamentally unfair to allow consideration for promotion by a special selection board with inclusion of a report that was filed in accordance with prevailing policy without justification that supports making an exception to policy. Therefore, based on the foregoing and in the absence of 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 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-2010-04015 in Executive Session on 19 July 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-04015 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Oct 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 13 Jan 11. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 24 Jan 11. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Feb 11. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Feb 11. Panel Chair