ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-01449
INDEX CODE: 131.01
COUNSEL: GUY J. FERRANTE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
____________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE
In an application dated 1 March 1997, applicant requested that he be
considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special
Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1994A (CY94A) Central
Lieutenant Colonel Board and his Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) for
the CY94A Lieutenant Colonel Board be replaced with a reaccomplished PRF.
On 10 June 1998, the Board considered and granted the portion of the
applicant's application requesting that he be considered for promotion to
the grade of lieutenant colonel by SSB for the CY94A selection board.
The Board found insufficient relevant evidence had been presented to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice warranting
replacement of the PRF for the CY94A board. A complete copy of the
Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit H.
On 1 December 1998, counsel for the applicant submitted additional
documentation and requested reconsideration of the application. A
complete copy of the request, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit I.
the case was reopened. (Exhibit I).
____________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. This Board previously
considered applicant’s request to have his contested PRF, prepared for
the CY94A lieutenant colonel selection, be voided and replaced with a
reaccomplished PRF. The statements from the senior rater and the MLEB
president were noted; however, since these individuals were aware that
applicant had been nominated for the award of the Lance P. Sijan USAF
Leadership Award, we were not persuaded the contested PRF should be
replaced. Another statement has been submitted from the MLEB president,
indicating that he was not aware of applicant’s winning the Lance P.
Sijan Award at RAF Mildenhall. After reviewing the evidence of record,
to include the additional documentation submitted, we still are not
persuaded that the contested PRF should be voided and replaced with a
reaccomplished PRF. Applicant’s records reviewed by these individuals
contained information that applicant was nominated for the award; and,
had they believed that this nomination should have been included on the
PRF they would have done so at that time. The senior rater was the
reviewing official on the Officer Performance Report (OPR) closing 11
September 1993, which documents applicant’s nomination. Surely, if he
believed that this information was important, he would have included it
on the contested PRF. In view of our above determination, we again find
no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on the relief
requested.
2. 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 issue(s) involved. Therefore, the
request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
___________________________________________________________
DECISION OF THE BOARD:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the applicant
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 this application in
Executive Session on 20 April 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Martha Maust, Panel Chair
Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
Mr. Michael P. Higgins, Member
Ms. Phyllis L. Spence, Examiner (without vote)
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit H. ROP, dated 27 August 1998, w/atchs.
Exhibit I. Counsel's letter, dated 1 December 1998,
w/atchs.
MARTHA MAUST
Panel Chair
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit H. On 1 December 1998, counsel for the applicant submitted additional documentation and requested reconsideration of the application. The statements from the senior rater and the MLEB president were noted; however, since these individuals were aware that applicant had been nominated for the award of the Lance P. Sijan USAF Leadership Award, we were not persuaded the contested PRF should be replaced. After reviewing the...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-01449A
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit H. On 1 December 1998, counsel for the applicant submitted additional documentation and requested reconsideration of the application. The statements from the senior rater and the MLEB president were noted; however, since these individuals were aware that applicant had been nominated for the award of the Lance P. Sijan USAF Leadership Award, we were not persuaded the contested PRF should be replaced. After reviewing the...
On the contrary, the issue here is whether any error has occurred within an internal Air Force promotion recommendation procedure (unlike Sanders, this applicant has not proven the existence of any error requiring correction) , wherein the final promotion recommendation (DP, Promote, Do Not Promote) cannot exist without the concurrence of the officers who authored and approved it. The attached reaccomplished PRF, reflecting a promotion recommendation of IIDefinitely Promote (DP) , be...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Senior Attorney-Advisor, AFPC/JA, reviewed this application and states that the entire Air Force promotion recommendation process is totally a creature of Air Force regulation; it is not governed at all by statute or DoD Directive. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-01786
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. The Senior Attorney-Advisor, AFPC/JA, reviewed this application and states that the entire Air Force promotion recommendation process is totally a creature of Air Force regulation; it is not governed at all by statute or DoD Directive. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that...
The Air Force officer promotion boards which considered his records for promotion were held in violation of statute, DoD Directive and Air Force regulations. DPPPA indicated that if the Board should grant the applicant’s request to receive SSB consideration by the CY93A central selection board, with a corrected Apr 93 OPR and CY93A (P0593A) PRF, the “corrected by” annotations on those reports (and any other corrected documents in his OSR) will be removed. In this respect, we note the...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1995-00115
The Air Force officer promotion boards which considered his records for promotion were held in violation of statute, DoD Directive and Air Force regulations. DPPPA indicated that if the Board should grant the applicant’s request to receive SSB consideration by the CY93A central selection board, with a corrected Apr 93 OPR and CY93A (P0593A) PRF, the “corrected by” annotations on those reports (and any other corrected documents in his OSR) will be removed. In this respect, we note the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-1995-03805-3
It was the decision of the USAFE MLEB that his records go to the aggregate board to compete for a “DP” recommendation. In letters of 13 January and 2 December 2005, the applicant and his counsel request direct promotion to the grade of colonel, or in the alternative, SSB consideration for the CY 94 Col Board with a “DP” PRF, contending that applicant never received a “P” recommendation from the aggregate board and that based on his record of performance, would have received a...
RESUME OF CASE: On 17 August 1995, the Board considered and approved the applicant's request that his PRF for the P0591B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board be replaced with a reaccomplished "Promote" PRF and that he be afforded Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration. Applicant is asserting that the Board failed to provide complete relief in its original decision, and that the promotion selection boards that considered his record were not held in compliance with law and...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00189
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00189 (CASE 2) INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year 1994A (CY94A) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board be voided and replaced with a reaccomplished PRF. On 1 Nov 01, the Board...