RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00010
INDEX CODE:
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His Officer Selection Brief (OSB) be corrected to reflect his
aeronautical rating, flying status, and flight hours.
2. He be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel
by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1998B
Lieutenant Colonel Board.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His OSB contained incorrect aeronautical/flying data for the CY98B
lieutenant colonel board which convened 1 June 1998.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of Aeronautical
Order #166, dated 6 November 1997, reflecting award of master
navigator effective 1 October 1997, a copy of an Individual Data
Summary that he states was faxed to AFPC on or about 11 March 1998 to
update his aeronautical rating and a letter dated 29 December 1998,
from his Host Operations System Management (HOSM) Office that reflects
his current flying hours and aircraft.
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 consider and not selected for promotion to the grade of
lieutenant colonel by the CY98B Selection Board.
OPR profile since 1991, follows:
PERIOD ENDING EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL
15 May 91 Meets Standards (MS)
15 May 92 MS
30 Apr 93 MS
30 Apr 94 MS
30 Apr 95 MS
30 Apr 96 MS
30 Apr 97 MS
30 Apr 98 MS
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Officer Promotion Management, AFPC/DPPPO, reviewed the
application and states that it is the applicant’s responsibility to
ensure his records are correct prior to the convening of the board.
They also state that the MPF Memorandum (MPFM) 98-4, dated 15 January
1998, states that for correction, officer should request their Host
Operations System Management (HOSM) provide them with a correct update
of their flying hours. They note this can then be presented to the
board if the officer writes a letter to the board president and
attaches the HOSM’s update. Furthermore, HOSM update letters may also
be forwarded to AFPC/DPPPOO for changes to the OSB in lieu of a letter
to the board president. In reference to the applicant providing a
copy of the aeronautical order changing his aeronautical rating and a
summary sheet he contends was faxed to an office at AFPC, they state
there is no evidence to show he attempted to communicate with the
board president or AFPC/DPPPOO in order to have the information
corrected on his OSB; nor does he address his Officer Preselection
Brief which he would have received for review approximately 100 days
prior to the 1 June 1998 board.
They quote AFI 36-3501 stating, “Do not have an SSB if, by exercising
reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error or
omission and could have taken corrective action before the originally
scheduled board convened.” In this case, the applicant has not
provided sufficient documentation to indicate he exercised reasonable
diligence to correct his records prior to his promotion board.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
The Acting Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed the
application and states that the applicant indicates his Individual
Data Summary was datafaxed to an individual at AFPC from his
organization on or about 11 May 1998. They point out that the
individual to whom the datafax was forwarded does not work in the
Officer Promotions Branch. Furthermore, he did not provide a datafax
cover sheet to confirm if/when the datafax was sent. They also find
it interesting to note that the applicant is and was stationed at
Randolph AFB at the time of the board. They see no evidence included
with his application that he made an attempt to visit AFPC prior to
the board to ensure his officer selection record was accurate. They
state regardless, the memorandum forwarded to each officer notifying
them of their eligibility specifically cites which office must be
contacted for each correction to the officer preselection brief.
There is no indication in the applicant’s supporting documentation
that he attempted to work through the appropriate office prior to the
board to correct his aeronautical data. Therefore, based on evidence
provided and the assessment by AFPC/DPPPOO, promotion reconsideration
is not warranted.
A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 1 March 1999, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to
the applicant for review and response within 30 days. 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice. After reviewing the
evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant’s records
are in error or that he has been the victim of an injustice. His
contentions are noted; however, in our opinion, the detailed comments
provided by the appropriate Air Force offices adequately address those
allegations. Therefore, we agree with opinions and recommendations of
the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice;
that the application 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 29 June 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Robert W. Zook, Panel Chair
Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Member
Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Dec 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 9 Feb 99.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 10 Feb 99.
Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 1 Mar 99.
ROBERT W. ZOOK
Panel Chair
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...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-01222
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...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Directorate of Assignments, HQ AFPC/DPAPS1, stated that based on the applicant’s selection folder, the duty titles and effective dates in question were in error on the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) at the time of the CY98B lieutenant colonel selection board. DPPPA noted the duty history corrections made to the applicant’s records by HQ AFPC/DPAPS1. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Reports & Queries Section, AFPC/DPAPS1, reviewed this application and indicated that the reviewer for the OPR closing 31 Dec 94 signed as Commander of the USAF Air Warfare Center so “Center” is the correct duty command level for this duty entry. This OPR clearly shows that the duty title was incorrect on the OPB for the 950701 entry; therefore, DPAPS1 changed the duty title for this entry in...
As they have stated, the same errors existed on his P0597C OSB, and the applicant has not explained why he took no action when he received his OPB for that board to get the errors corrected. They noted that with the exception of the 1 Apr 94 error (CMHQ vs. W/B), the same errors the applicant is now pointing out were also in existence at the time of the P0494A board as well. Even though they were in error on the OSB, they were correct on the OPRs.
The inconsistencies between the duty titles on his Office Performance Reports (OPRs) and those listed on his Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) prior to his consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the P0498B central board have been administratively corrected. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02973 INDEX CODE 100.05 131.01 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for the Calendar Year 1998B (CY98B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection board with his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reflecting the duty history and Duty Air Force Specialty...
He also believes he may have been nonselected because of a perception among the board members that he spent too much time at Kirtland AFB, NM. DPPPA stated that it was the applicant’s responsibility to notify the board of the circumstances surrounding his extended tenure at one location, and the omission of the duty title effective 18 Dec 93 from his OSB if he believed them important to his promotion consideration. ...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01399 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Letter of Evaluation (LOE), dated 3 Feb 96, become a permanent addendum to his Officer Performance Report (OPR) for the period ending 30 Nov 96; his Officer Selection Brief (OSB), dated 19 May 98, be corrected to reflect his Date of Separation as Indefinite and any reference to a retirement date...