RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02400
INDEX CODE: 131
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. The AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, for the period
16 April 1990 through 28 December 1990, be removed from her Officer
Selection Record (OSR) and adjust the start date and close out date of
the preceding and subsequent Officer Performance Reports (OPRs).
2. Her nonselections for promotion to the grade of major, by the
Calendar Years 1997C and 1998B (CY97C & CY98B) major promotion boards
and, the nonselection by the CY97C Special Selection Board (SSB), be
set aside.
3. She have the opportunity to have her corrected record reviewed by
the Senior Rater for the CY97C and CY98B selection boards to determine
whether the change would have made a difference on the promotion
recommendation forms (PRFs).
4. Her record be corrected to show she was promoted to the grade of
major as if selected by the CY97C Central Major Board in-the-promotion
zone (IPZ).
5. Her records be corrected to include restoration of all pay,
benefits, and any other entitlements associated with her retroactive
promotion.
6. In the applicant’s response to the Air Force evaluations, she
requests that the AFBCMR direct her promotion to the grade of major as
if selected by the CY98B selection board to include reinstatement to
active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Although the AFBCMR directed removal of a tainted Officer Performance
Report (OPR) [on 4 June 1997, the report was replaced with an Air
Force Form 77, for the period 16 Apr 90 thru 28 Dec 90] the correction
itself left her file substantially incomplete and unfairly portrayed
her performance. The AFBCMR found her record in error and directed a
special selection board (SSB) for promotion consideration to the grade
of major. She was nonselected. Therefore, the evidence proves that
even as corrected, her file remained tainted for purposes of promotion
consideration.
Applicant alleges that the AF Form 77 is prejudicial and that her
record was incomplete before the selection boards. Obviously, the AF
Form 77 “dilutes the effectiveness by holding that she is entitled to
something less that she would have had if the erroneous OPR had not
been made.
Applicant also makes numerous allegations that both central and
special selection boards that considered her for promotion were
illegal and conducted in violation of statute and DoD Directive.
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant in the Regular Air Force
on 25 July 1986.
Applicant was considered and nonselected for promotion to the grade of
major by the Calendar Year 1997C (CY97C) (16 Jun 97) and CY98B (6 Apr
98) Central Major Selection Boards.
Applicant’s Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile is as follows:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
15 Apr 90 (1LT) Meets Standards
* 28 Dec 90 (Capt) AF Form 77
28 Dec 91 Meets Standards
28 Dec 92 Meets Standards
15 Jul 93 Meets Standards
1 Feb 94 Meets Standards
1 Feb 95 Meets Standards
1 Feb 96 Meets Standards
13 Sep 96 Meets Standards
# 28 Feb 97 Meets Standards
## 6 Jan 98 Meets Standards
# Top report at time of nonselection to the grade of major
by the CY97C Central Major Selection Board.
## Top report at time of nonselection to the grade of major
by the CY98B Central Major Selection Board.
Available records reflect that the applicant was released from active
duty in the Regular Air Force on 31 December 1998, in the grade of
captain, and transferred to the Air Force Reserve. She is currently
serving in the Air Force Reserve. Applicant was subsequently promoted
to the grade of major by the Fiscal Year 2000 (FY00) Air Force Reserve
Line Major and Position Vacancy Promotion Board.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Evaluation Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, states that
first, adjusting the close out date of the previous OPR (15 Apr 90) is
not an option. This report was a 365-day annual report. There are no
provisions in AFR 36-10 or AFI 36-2402 allowing for a report covering
over 12 months to exceed 120 days of supervision. Similarly,
adjusting the “from” date of the subsequent report (28 Dec 91) is
inappropriate, as it was also an annual report with 323 days of
supervision. Changing the “from” date would cause the report to cover
over 20 months, yet still have 323 days of supervision. Applicant’s
request would not restore her file “to the same condition it would
have been in,” but would serve only to misrepresent what actually
occurred by attempting to mask over the period covered by the voided
OPR and AF Form 77. Since there are no remedies to adjust the OPRs,
applicant presently has no recourse to have her record re-evaluated by
her senior rater and management level review (MLR) president.
Recommend her request be denied.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
The Chief of Operations, Selection Board Secretariat, HQ AFPC/DPPB,
states that the applicant makes numerous allegations pertaining to the
selection board processes. She contends that the board members do not
see a complete select list; she challenges the scoring system used by
central selection boards; she contends that the Air Force has neither
developed nor issued standard operating procedures for selection
boards; and, that the quality review worksheet is not approved for use
and is used to allow officials not members of the board to communicate
their views to the board. Applicant also contends that the below-the-
promotion zone (BPZ) offset was completed at the panel level rather
than board level, and that the special selection board scoring
procedures are arbitrary and capricious. However, these allegations
are unfounded. The applicant bases most of her allegations and
contentions on the legal issue of using panels. AFPC/DPPB defers to
AFPC/JA for those responses.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
The Chief, Appeals and SSB Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, states that they do
not believe the AF Form 77 was prejudicial nor was a contributing
factor in the applicant’s nonselection by either the CY97C or CY98B
selection boards. The statements on the AF Form 77 are not viewed in
a negative light by promotion boards or SSBs. Further, to grant a
direct promotion would be unfair to all other officers who have
extremely competitive records and also did not get promoted. Other
than her own opinion, the applicant has provided no substantiation to
her allegations. They recommend the applicant’s requests be denied.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.
The Staff Judge Advocate, HQ AFPC/JA, reviewed the application and
stated that it is the opinion of HQ AFPC/JA that the application
should be denied. Applicant has failed to present relevant evidence
of any error or injustice warranting relief.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
1 March 1999 for review and response. Applicant submitted a response,
with attachments, to include letters from her senior rater, dated 6
October 1997 and the President of the HQ NORAD Management Level Review
Board (MLRB), dated 6 November 1997,(Exhibit H) in which they discuss
the applicant’s promotion recommendation for the CY97C selection
board.
The applicant also submitted additional documentation and states that
her recent selection for promotion to the grade of major by the Air
Force Reserve confirms her record is indeed competitive in any fairly
operated selection process
Complete copies of the applicant’s responses, with attachments, are
attached at Exhibits H and I.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 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 warranting favorable
consideration to a portion of applicant’s requests. We note that the
applicant, under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, appealed an Officer
Performance Report (OPR) for the period closing 28 December 1990 and
the report was removed by the Secretary of the Air Force and replaced
with an AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, to document the gap
in her record. This correction was made on 4 June 1997 just prior to
the convening of the Calendar Year 1997C (CY97C) Central Major
Selection Board. However, the prejudicial referral OPR was a matter
of record when her Senior Rater and the Management Level Review Board
(MLRB) considered the applicant for a promotion recommendation. Since
the OPR was still a matter of record at the time of the MLRB review,
we do not believe the applicant was fairly considered for a promotion
recommendation. We also note the strong supporting statements from
the Senior Rater and the MLRB President indicating that with the
referral OPR removed from her records, she would have been extremely
competitive and there is no doubt that a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation would have been appropriate. We cannot determine
whether or not this error served to preclude the applicant from being
selected for promotion to the grade of major but we do believe there
was an injustice. 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.
4. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice with regard to the
remainder of applicant’s requests. Applicant’s numerous contentions
concerning the statutory compliance of the central selection boards,
the legality of the special selection board (SSB) process, the tainted
benchmark records and different competitive pool, are duly noted.
However, after a thorough review of the evidence of record and
applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that the AF Form 77, for
the period closing 28 December 1990, should be removed; that the start
dates and close out dates of the preceding and subsequent Officer
Performance Reports (OPRs) should be adjusted; that her nonselections
for promotion to the grade of major, by the CY97C and CY98B promotion
boards be set aside; or, that she receive a direct promotion to the
grade of major with back pay and benefits. We do not find applicant’s
assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override
the rationale provided by the Air Force. We therefore agree with the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
her burden that she has suffered either an error or an injustice.
Therefore, we find no compelling basis to recommend grantng the relief
sought.
5. The documentation provided with this case was sufficient to give
the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a personal
appearance, with or without counsel, would not have materially added
to that understanding. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not
favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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, considered by the Calendar Year 1997C
(CY97C) Central Major Selection Board (PO497C), be amended in Section
IX, Overall Recommendation, to reflect: “Definitely Promote.”
It is further recommended that her records, to include the amended AF
Form 709, (PO497C), be considered for promotion to the grade of major
by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1997C Central
Major Selection Board.
_______________________________________________________________________
_______
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 23 September 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Aug 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Officer Selection Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, dated 1 Oct 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPB, dated 2 Dec 98.
Exhibit E. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, dated 15 Dec 98.
Exhibit F. Letter, HQ AFPC/JA, dated 11 Feb 99.
Exhibit G. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 1 Mar 99.
Exhibit H. Applicant’s Letter, undated, w/atchs.
Exhibit I. Applicant’s Letter, undated, w/atchs.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Panel Chair
INDEX CODE: 131
AFBCMR 98-02400
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:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to , be corrected to show that the Promotion
Recommendation, AF Form 709, considered by the Calendar Year 1997C
(CY97C) Central Major Selection Board (PO497C), be amended in Section
IX, Overall Recommendation, to reflect: “Definitely Promote.”
It is further directed that her records, to include the amended
AF Form 709, (PO497C), be considered for promotion to the grade of
major by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1997C
Central Major Selection Board.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
c. The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) reviewed by the CY97C board reflect an overall recommendation of “Definitely Promote (DP).” 3. He was promoted by SSB to major with annotations on his top two OPRs, and subsequently promoted APZ to LTC with the AF Form 77 and four OPRs with annotations in his records. He contends, in part, that his unnecessary break in service and the annotated documents in his records caused the MLR board not to award him a “DP” on the CY97C PRF and the promotion...
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.
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02409
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02409 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: RAYMOND J. TONEY HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for Calendar Years 1997C (CY97C) and 1998B (CY98B) Major Line Central Selection Boards (CSBs). A complete copy of the...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00117 R. KENNEY COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The AF Form 77 (Supplemental Evaluation Sheet), covering the period 3 February 1994 thru 27 November 1994, be removed from his records; the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reviewed by the Calendar Year (CY) 1997C Lt Colonel Board be corrected in...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-00117
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00117 R. KENNEY COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The AF Form 77 (Supplemental Evaluation Sheet), covering the period 3 February 1994 thru 27 November 1994, be removed from his records; the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reviewed by the Calendar Year (CY) 1997C Lt Colonel Board be corrected in...
IN THE MATTER OF: APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: I t RECORD' OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARDTFOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS JAN 15 ig,ag DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00436 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO He be given consideration for promotion to lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board Calendar Year 1997C (CY97C) Lieutenant Colonel reaccomplished Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) duty title of "Lead, C-17 Flexible Sustainment records. The contested PRF reflects an'bverall promotion...
DPPPA stated that both the Education/Training Report (TR) and MSM, 1OLC, were filed in the applicant’s Officer Selection Record (OSR) and considered by the P0597C central lieutenant colonel selection board. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that it ignores his contention that his pre-board records...
A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 June 1998 for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by special selection...
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...