RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01672 

 

 XXXX COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Duty Title of Bioenvironmental Engineer on his six Officer 
Performance Reports (OPRs) covering the period 12 Sep 98 through 
11 Sep 04 be changed to read “Bioenvironmental Engineering 
Flight Commander.” 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His duties as the base Bioenvironmental Engineer included 
activities, programs, and leading enlisted technicians enabling 
him to advise the Air National Guard wing leadership on health 
risks and emergency responses to maintain mission readiness. As 
part of both a medical group and a medical squadron, his key 
duties, tasks and responsibilities, as reflected in Part III, 
Block 2, of the OPRs in question support that his duties were in 
line with having the title Flight Commander over the period 
listed. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of 
memoranda of support from personnel at the National Guard Bureau 
and the Headquarters Air Force Surgeon General’s office, and six 
OPRs. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served as a second lieutenant in the Delaware Air 
National Guard and was progressively promoted to the rank of 
Captain during the period of time in question. 

 

On 10 Jan 05, the applicant was ordered onto Extended Active 
Duty. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility which is included at Exhibit C. 


 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

ARPC/DPTS recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice. The individuals providing statements of 
support do not appear to be Commander’s with the authority to 
award the requested change. No source document exists in the 
applicant’s record, nor were any provided by the applicant to 
administratively change his duty title to Flight Commander. We 
previous requested that one of the source documents provided 
would be an AF Form 2096, Classification/On-the-Job Training 
Action or special orders (P-Series) to correct the applicant’s 
duty title in accordance with the Air National Guard, Review of 
Duty History Information, Personnel Services Delivery 
Transformation Guide, 20 Apr 12. The applicant did not provide 
statements from previous Commanders in his chain indicating an 
error or injustice occurred with establishing his duty title. 

 

A complete copy of the ARPC/DPTS evaluation, with attachments, 
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 Oct 12 for review and comment within 30 days. As 
of this date, no response has been received from the applicant 
by this office. However, a letter of support from the Commander 
of the 166th Medical Group, dated 13 Nov 12, was submitted to on 
behalf of the applicant (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, 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. While we note the 
letters of support for the applicant, we do not find the 
documentation presented sufficient to establish that he was a 
victim of an error or injustice, or to warrant changing 
previously established official duty titles eight years after 


the fact. 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 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-2012-01672 in Executive Session on 13 Dec 12, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 XXXXX, Panel Chair 

 XXXXX, Member 

 XXXXX, Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Mar 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPTS, dated 2 Oct 12 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Oct 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, 166 MDG/CC, dated 13 Nov 12. 

 

 

 

 

 XXXXX 

 Panel Chair