RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02562
INDEX CODE: 131.01
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar
Year 1997D (CY97D) (5 Nov 97) Central Major Board with inclusion of
the Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 24 Nov 96
through 30 Jun 97 in her officer selection record (OSR).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The contested OPR was missing from her OSR when the CY97D board
convened. She also noted that her overseas duty history was missing
from her Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and her National Certification
Board of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners and Nurses certificate was not
filed in her OSR.
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 27 Jan 82, the applicant entered extended active duty. On 19 Apr
90, the applicant was released from active duty under the provisions
of AFR 36-12 (Voluntary Release: Miscellaneous Reasons) in the grade
of captain with an honorable characterization of service. She was
credited with 8 years, 2 months, and 23 days of active service.
On 24 Nov 95, the applicant entered EAD. She is currently serving on
EAD in the grade of captain, effective, and with a date of rank (DOR)
of 25 Jul 89. She currently has a date of separation (DOS) of 23 Nov
99.
Applicant’s Officer Effectiveness Report (OER)/OPR profile since 1985
reflects the following:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
9 Nov 85 1-1-1
10 Aug 86 1-1-1
8 Dec 86 1-1-1
19 Nov 87 1-1-1
29 Jan 88 Education/Training Report (TR)
29 Jan 89 Meets Standards
29 Jan 90 Meets Standards
Not Rated Due to Break in Service
23 Nov 96 Meets Standards
* 30 Jun 97 Meets Standards
30 Jun 98 Meets Standards
* Contested report.
Applicant has one nonselection for promotion to the grade of major by
the CY97D Central Major Board.
Applicant filed a similar appeal under AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer
and Enlisted Reports. The Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB)
reviewed her case for merit but returned it without action on 6 Jul 98
because she was requesting SSB consideration by the CY97D board with
inclusion of the OPR that had already been filed in her OSR.
The Air Force indicated that Headquarters AFPC/DPPAPP1 updated
applicant’s overseas duty data in the Headquarters Air Force File
(HAF) on 24 Sep 98 and stated that a copy of applicant’s National
Certification Board of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners and Nurses
certificate was filed in her OSR on 25 Sep 98.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed this application
and indicated that under normal circumstances, they would recommend
approval of granting applicant SSB consideration by the CY97D Board
because OPRs are required to be filed in the OSR no later than 60 days
after the close out date of the report. However, in this case, the
contested OPR was not completed until 26 May 98, some 11 months after
the report closed out. The applicant provided information/support
from her rater and rater’s rater indicating a breakdown in squadron
OPR processing procedures. Evidently, her rater requested a change of
rater (CRO) effective 1 Jul 97 but the request was not properly
processed in Personnel Concepts III (PCIII) and an OPR shell was not
produced. The oversight was attributed to improperly trained
personnel in the squadron orderly room; however, the rater never
followed up after the initial request for a CRO OPR shell. The rater
also states that he confused the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF)
request for the OPR shell. DPPPA finds that hard to believe-
especially since an OPR shell is two pages and a PRF request contains
only one. They contend her rater (a major) had no doubt written OPRs
and PRFs in the past and should have known the difference between the
two products, or in the very least, questioned why the shell was in a
different format. The applicant does not provide any information from
the reviewing official. Although the OPR was very late to file
(almost an entire year after the close out date of the report), it did
not exist until May 98, some six months after the CY97D board was
held. DPPPA, therefore, would be opposed to the applicant receiving
SSB consideration by the CY97D Board with the OPR included in her OSR.
The applicant claims she reviewed her officer preselection brief (OPB)
carefully when she received it and discovered her professional board
certification was missing and she claims she worked closely with her
local military personnel flight (MPF) to correct the error. However,
the board certification certificate was not filed in her OSB when she
met the CY97D board. DPPPA is convinced the CY97D board was aware of
her board certification and appropriately factored it into their
promotion assessment of the applicant because the CY97D OSB was
properly annotated “Yes.” More importantly, her OSR contains a record
discrepancy memorandum from Headquarters AFPC/DPPBR1 indicating the
board certification certificate was missing from her OSR which
confirms the board was aware of her certification status.
Applicant claims she carefully reviewed her OSB prior to the CY97D
board; however, she did not mention that she discovered the missing
overseas duty data until after the CY97D board was held. Had the
applicant carefully reviewed her OPB prior to the CY97D board as she
states she did, the overseas data would have been present for the
CY97D board’s review. Additionally, the duty history portion of her
OSB and her OPRs documented tours of overseas duty at Torrejon, Spain,
and Osan Air Base, Korea.
DPPPA further states that central boards evaluate the entire OSR
(including the PRF, OPRs, OERs, TRs, letters of evaluation,
decorations, and OSB), assessing whole person factors such as job
performance, professional qualities, depth and breadth of experience,
leadership, and academic and professional military education. The
selection board had applicant’s entire OSR that clearly outlines her
accomplishments since the date she came on active duty. DPPPA is not
convinced the missing OPR, board certification certificate from her
OSR, or the missing overseas duty data from her OSB caused applicant’s
nonselection and therefore are opposed to her receiving SSB
consideration.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 8 Oct
98 for review and response. As of this date, no response has been
received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. We recognize that the
report in question was not completed until 26 May 98, 11 months after
the report closed out. However, we note the statement provided by the
commander to the 6th Medical Operations Squadron, dated 8 May 98, who
indicates that the 6th Medical Operations Squadron failed to submit
the contested report in a timely manner. He indicates two distinct
breakdowns in accountability occurred: (1) Applicant’s previous rater
completed a CRO action but failed to begin preparation/submission of
applicant’s performance report for the period in question; and (2) A
RIP was not generated from PCIII to prompt action from applicant’s
previous rater to ensure completion of her performance report. We
also noted the statement provided by the rater of the contested report
who states that no RIP was generated for the submission of an OPR for
the CRO and he was unaware at that time that such changes required an
OPR by the out-going rater. He also states that he confused the PRF
with the OPR and told the applicant that he had already written and
submitted it. In view of these statements, and in order to offset any
possibility of an injustice to the applicant, we recommend her record,
to include the OPR in question, be considered for promotion to the
grade of major by SSB for the CY97D selection board.
4. We note that applicant mentions her overseas duty history was
missing from her OSB and her National Certification Board of Pediatric
Nurse Practitioners and Nurses certificate was not filed in her OSR.
However, as stated by the Air Force, applicant’s OSR contained a
record discrepancy memorandum from AFPC/DPPBR1 indicating the board
certification certificate was missing from her OSR which confirms that
the board was aware of her certification status. Further, the duty
history portion of her OSB and her OPRs documented tours of overseas
duty at Torrejon, Spain, and Osan AB, Korea. In view of the
foregoing, we are not persuaded that these omissions constitute
anything more than harmless errors. Applicant has not provided
persuasive evidence that these omissions were the sole cause of her
nonselection.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, to include the OPR, AF Form 707B, rendered for
the period 24 Nov 96 through 30 Jun 97, be considered for promotion to
the grade of major by SSB for the CY97D Central Major Board.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 10 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner (without vote)
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 8 Oct 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Oct 98.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
INDEX CODE: 131.01
AFBCMR 98-02562
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 , to include the Officer Performance Report (OPR),
AF Form 707B, rendered for the period 24 November 1996 through 30 June
1997, be considered for promotion to the grade of major by Special
Selection Board for the Calendar Year 1997D Central Major Board.
JOE G.
LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force
Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1999-01802
She currently has a DOS of 23 Nov 99. The Chief states that selective continuation of twice nonselected officers was not offered for the Mar 99 Nurse Corps Major promotion board; thus, the applicant has a mandatory DOS. DPPPA notes that the contested TR was part of the applicant’s OSR when she was considered for promotion to major by the CY97D board and the DOS of 23 Nov 99 was reflected on both of her CY97D and CY99A OSBs.
She currently has a DOS of 23 Nov 99. The Chief states that selective continuation of twice nonselected officers was not offered for the Mar 99 Nurse Corps Major promotion board; thus, the applicant has a mandatory DOS. DPPPA notes that the contested TR was part of the applicant’s OSR when she was considered for promotion to major by the CY97D board and the DOS of 23 Nov 99 was reflected on both of her CY97D and CY99A OSBs.
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-03777
Inasmuch as the above corrections were accomplished subsequent to his consideration for promotion by the CY97B and CY97E Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, we recommend that the applicant’s corrected record be reviewed when he is considered for promotion by an SSB. It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the CY 97B (2 June 1997) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, and for any subsequent board for...
Inasmuch as the above corrections were accomplished subsequent to his consideration for promotion by the CY97B and CY97E Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, we recommend that the applicant’s corrected record be reviewed when he is considered for promotion by an SSB. It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the CY 97B (2 June 1997) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, and for any subsequent board for...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, also evaluated the case and would have no objection to the applicant meeting an SSB with the 25 November 1996 OPR in her records and the requested duty title change made to the CY97A OSB. The applicant, a medical service corps officer, requests special selection board (SSB) consideration for the CY97A (3 Feb 97) (P0497A) major board, With inclusion of the officer performance report...
At the time applicant's record was considered for promotion to the grade of major by the CY97 board, his Officer Selection Record TOSR) did not include the citations for the decorations listed above, and his overseas duty history did not reflect his assignment in West Berlin. The Air Force states that even though the contested decoration citations were not on file in the OSR when the board convened, they board members knew of their existence as evidenced by both the entries on the Officer...
In support of the application, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of PRF's and OSB's, a copy of the original and corrected training report (TR), memorandum of instructions to the CY97E and CY99A lieutenant colonel selection boards, the 14 Sep 98 and the 8 Mar 99 SSB's, her officer selection record (OSR) prepared 16 Nov 99, and other documents relative to the issue under review. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01106
Included in support is a statement from the 19 Sep 98 OPR rater who recommended the applicant’s duty title be changed to “SQ Pilot Scheduler/C-130H Pilot.” Despite the applicant’s request, the senior rater did not support the changes to the PRF or SSB consideration, asserting that while he regretted the administrative errors, they were minor and did not change the information in Section IV or in the OPRs. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-02883
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02883 INDEX CODE: 111.01, 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Professional Military Education (PME) recommendations on his Officer Performance Reports (OPRs), closing 19 Mar 94 and 25 Nov 94, be changed from Intermediate Service School (ISS) to Senior Service School (SSS). The...
The instructions specifically state that officers will not be considered by an SSB if, in exercising reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error or omission in his/her records and could have taken timely corrective action. Had he been diligent in maintaining his records, the duty title would have been present on the OSB for the board’s review. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 2 Nov 98.