AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY REC J@h 2 1998
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97-03573
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
-
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Officer Performance Report (OPR) which closed out 15 Jun 97,
be included for consideration on the CY97C Lt Col selection board
through the Special Selection Board (SSB).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2402, OPRs are used to document
performance.
It is a permanent record of an officer's
performance over a specific period. It assesses and documents
what the officer did, how well it was done, and potential based
on that performance. She states that her OPR which closed out
15 Jun 97 was not considered by the CY97 Lt Col selection board
which convened 21 Jul 97. She also states that her record, as
viewed by the Central Selection Board, omitted over one year of
current documented performance. To justly select officers for
promotion, the Central Selection Board should consider/review the
officer's entire record.
If the entire record is not
considered/reviewed, an injustice has been done.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the
grade of major.
Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the
grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY97C lieutenant colonel
board.
OPR profile since 1990 follows:
PERIOD ENDING
EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL
20 Jun 90
20 Jun 91
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
97- 03573
1 Nov 9 1
1 Nov 92
2 9 Jul 93
2 9 Jul 94
15 Jun 95
#15 Jun 96
*15 Jun 97
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
Meets Standards
*Report in question
#Top report on file at time of board
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
paragraph 3 . 6 . 4 . 3 ,
The Chief, Appeals and SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed the
application and states that AFI 36-2402,
states OPRs are due for file at HQ AFPC no later than 60 days
after the closeout date. The OPR was not due for file until
15 Aug 97 and, therefore, not required to be on file for the
board. In this case, the applicant has provided nothing from the
evaluators to indicate what steps, if any, were taken to ensure
the OPR was expedited in time to be considered by the board.
They also note that each officer eligible for promotion
consideration is advised of the entitlement to communicate with
the board president. The applicant could have used this means to
inform the board president of her accomplishments during the Jun
96 through Jun 97 rating period.
Therefore, they recommend
denial of applicant's request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant reviewed the evaluation and states that from the
evidence provided, her evaluators took steps to ensure her OPR
was expedited in time to be considered by the CY97C Lt Col
selection board. She took every step a reasonable person could
be expected to undertake given the circumstances. She states it
was impossible to communicate with the board the information she
considered important because it was not a matter of record as
required by AFI 36- 2402, attachment 1. She further states that
she strongly believes that it is not the intent of the OPR system
nor the Air Force promotion system to penalize her for a
situation over which she did all she could and the system failed
her. She respectfully request and trust that the AFBCMR will
review her case and based on its merits, documented evidence and
support, correct an unfortunate injustice that has had a lasting
impact on her, her family and her military career.
2
97- 03573
In support of the appeal, she provides a statement from the
rater, stating that they were geographically separated from their
Columbus, Ohio and the MPF located at
MPF b
AFB ,
licant is
DC; and be
be reviewe
field, her
acqui
She also provided a
acquisition examiner, located at
hnician, who states,
statement from the Military Pe
that she annotated the OPR with a note that stated that it,should
be expedited in time to be considered by the 21 Jul 97 Lt Col
Selection Board. She also states she followed through with these
instructions and coordinated with HQ DLA and the OPR was then
forwarded to HQ DLA by 2-day Priority Mail on 18 Jun 97.
A copy of applicant's response, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit E.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
~
The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
1.
law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3 . Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. After
reviewing the evidence of record, we are persuaded that the
contested OPR should have been a part of applicant's record when
she was considered for promotion by the CY97 lieutenant colonel
selection board.
In this respect, we note the statement
submitted from the rater who states that
separated from t
MPF located at
applicant was in
reviewed by an a
he coordinated with the MPF at
and expedited t
ent from the Military
convening date of 21 July
verifies that the
Personnel Technician at
contested OPR was intended
in time to be a part
of applicant's records when considered for promotion by the CY97
selection board. In view of these statements and noting that the
OPR had to be sent to at least three separate locations for
review, we believe that the applicant has established that the
rating official intended for the OPR i n question to be a matter
of record when the CY97 selection board convened on 21 July 1997.
Therefore, we recommend her record, to include the OPR closing
15 June 1997, be considered for promotion to the grade of
lieutenant colonel by SSB for the CY97 selection board.
had to be
3
97- 03573
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, to include the Officer Performance Report
rendered for the period 16 June 1996 through 15 June 1997, be
considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by
Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year 1997C Central
Lieutenant Colonel Board.
-
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 28 April 1998, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603 :
Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
Ms. Rita S. Looney, Member
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
Ms. Phyllis L. Spence, Examiner (without vote)
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Nov 97.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 7 Jan 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Jan 98.
Exhibit E. Applicant's Response, dated 24 Feb 98.
Panel Chair
-
4
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC
JMJ 1 2 1998
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AFBCMR 97-03573
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction
of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A
Stat 116), it is directed that:
records of the Department of the Air Force relating
clude the Officer Performance Report rendered for
June 1997, be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant
colonel by Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year 1997C Central Lieutenant Colonel
Board.
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
U
In this respect, the Board majority notes that the Evaluation Report Appeal Board ( E M ) corrected the contested OPR by changing the additional rater's PME recommendation from ISS to SSS. Therefore, a majority of the Board recommends his corrected record be considered by Special Selection Board for the CY97C board. In the applicant’s case, the information regarding the award was available based upon the announcement date of 24 Feb 97; however, there is no requirement in AFI 36-2402 that...
In support of his request, applicant submits copies of his AFI 36-2401 application, the AFI 36-2401 Decision, his OPR closing 15 Jun 97, and a statement from his Military Personnel Flight (MPR) (Exhibit A). Although the final evaluator signed the OPR on 27 Jun 97, the fact remains the OPR was not required to be filed in the applicant’s OSR before the selection board convened on 21 Jul 97 (Exhibit C). Despite the fact the 15 Jun 97 OPR was submitted on the correct closeout date, it was the...
Applicant alleges that his Officer Performance Report (OPR) closing 20 February 1997, was submitted on the wrong form and believes that this error had a negative influence on the CY97C lieutenant colonel selection board members. However, after reviewing applicant's comments to the Air Force evaluation, we are persuaded that his corrected record should be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY97C board. application.
We reviewed the statement provided by the additional rater/reviewer on the 2 June 1997 OPR, who indicated it was his intention that the report be included in the applicant’s record considered by the cited selection board. We also noted applicant‘s contention that his primary AFSC was incorrect on his “selection Report on Individual Personnel.” However, primary A F S C s are not reflected on officer selection briefs reviewed by promotion selection boards, only the member’s duty AFSCs are...
Had he properly reviewed his OPB at that time, he could have written a letter to the CY97C board president to ensure the information was present for the CY97C board's review - especially if the PME entry was important to his promotion consideration. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C . The Air Force has indicated that the entry for the Brazilian PME course was missing from the applicant's Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reviewed by the CY97C board.
It is the applicant's responsibility and not the MPF, flight records office or the Air Force, to ensure his records are correct prior to the board. c. Applicant claims a “gap between the effedive date of my aeronautical rating and the requested date of the order was caused because of a computer program update...” and that this “delay was the most probable cause in not updating my AIR FORCE OFFICER SELECTION BRIEF in time for the 9705C Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Board.” d. Applicant claims...
Therefore, we recommend that her record, to include the “Definitely Promote” recommendation on the CY97C PRF, be considered for promotion to the grade of major by special selection board (SSB) for the CY97C Central Major Selection Board. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 709,...
We note that applicant's records have now been corrected to reflect his correct duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC), and duty titles during the contested time period; therefore, the only issue for this Board to decide is promotion consideration by a Special Selection Board (SSB). Therefore, we recommend his corrected record be considered by Special Selection Board for the CY97C board. There is no evidence any steps were taken to make a correction to the DAFSC or duty title from the...
HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1997C Lieutenant Colonel Board, with the Meritorious Service Medal (First Leaf Cluster) (MSM(1OLC)) for the period 16 March O a k 1993-28 February 1995, included in his Officer Selection Record (OSR) . After careful consideration of the applicant‘s complete submission, we believe some doubt exists as to whether...
DPPPA stated each officer eligible for promotion consideration by the CY97C board received an officer preselection brief (OPB) several months prior to the date the board convened in July 1997. It was the applicant’s responsibility to have the erroneous information corrected prior to the board or, as a minimum, to notify the Board of the erroneous duty titles on his OSB by letter prior to the board if he believed it important to his promotion consideration. Several months prior to the...