RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02491
INDEX CODE: 131.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
SSN HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a special
selection board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2000A (CY00A) Selection
Board.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His Officer Selection Brief (OSB) which met the CY00A Major Central
Selection Board was missing, and did not reflect, correct information.
His Aerial Achievement Medal (AAM) (basic) was missing from the
promotion package. His college degree was listed as Food Service,
when he actually earned a degree in Business Administration; also the
name of the University he graduated from was listed incorrectly. His
Officer Performance Report (OPR) for the period ending 21 Dec 99 was
two sheets stapled together, instead of one sheet with the information
on both sides, thus giving his package a haphazard look.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of captain.
Applicant was considered, but not selected for promotion to the grade
of major by the CY00A selection board.
Applicant’s OPR profile as a captain is listed below.
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
29 Dec 93 Meets Standards
29 Dec 94 Meets Standards
29 Dec 95 Meets Standards
29 Dec 96 Meets Standards
29 Dec 97 Meets Standards
29 Dec 98 Meets Standards
*21 Dec 99 Meets Standards
20 Jun 00 Meets Standards
*Top report on file at time of CY00A board.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Officer Promotion and Appointment Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPOO,
reviewed this application and states that every eligible officer
receives an Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) several months prior to a
selection board. The data on the OPB reflects what will appear on the
OSB at the central board. The servicemember is given written
instructions to carefully examine the brief and if the brief contains
any inaccuracies it tells them what actions they need to take to
correct the information prior to the board. The instructions also
state, “Officers will not be considered by a Special Selection Board
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.” The applicant has not demonstrated
he exercised “reasonable diligence” in getting the erroneous
information corrected as is evidenced by a Report on Individual Person
(RIP) he submitted that was dated 8 Jul 98. Therefore they recommend
denying the applicant’s request.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
The Acting Chief, Appeals and SSB Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, states that
the applicant contends his citation for the AAM (basic) was not in his
officer selection record (OSR) for review by the selection board. The
applicant was awarded the AAM on 30 Sep 93; this was the first of four
AAMs. The first, second and third Oak Leaf Clusters (OLCs) were
available in his OSR. The AAM was updated in the Personnel Data
System (PDS) but was not filed in the member’s OSR until 15 May 00.
Although the applicant’s first AAM was not in the record when the
board convened, the board was knowledgeable of its existence by the
entry on the OSB and the first, second and third OLCs to the medal.
Also, all accomplishments that were included in the citation were
written into the applicant’s OPRs covering the inclusive dates of the
decoration. The AAM being absent from the member’s OSR is not a
material error and does not warrant SSB consideration.
Another contention of the applicant’s is his 21 Dec 99 OPR was stapled
back to back instead of being on one sheet of paper with information
on both sides, thus giving his package a haphazard appearance upon
presentation to the board. If a board date is fast approaching it is
customary to data fax the OPR to the board to ensure that the board
gets to review the member’s most current OPR. This is what happened
in the applicant’s case. His OPR was filed into his OSR on 20 Jan 00,
four days prior to the convening date of the board. The applicant’s
OPR was not handled any differently than any other member’s OPR that
had been data faxed prior to the board convening date.
DPPPA also stated that the applicant’s academic degree specialty was a
prerequisite for being commissioned as an officer in the Air Force and
not a reflection of further education completed while serving on
active duty.
DPPAA concurs with the findings and recommendations of DPPPOO and also
recommends denying the applicant’s request due to lack of merit.
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:
On 27 Oct 00, 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. The applicant is correct
and the Air Force acknowledges that for the CY00 Central Majors Board
the citation for the basic AAM was not in the applicant’s selection
record; the applicant’s college and associated academic major were
inaccurately listed on the selection brief; and the top report for the
CY00 selection board was stapled together when it was presented to the
selection board. However, after a thorough review of the available
evidence, we do not find that it provides a showing that these caused
the applicant’s record to be so inaccurate or misleading that the duly
constituted selection board was unable to reach a reasonable decision
concerning his promotibilty in relationship to his peers. Since
selection boards consider an officer’s entire record, and it is
generally accepted that the officer’s performance record is the
paramount consideration in the promotion process, the impact of these
contested irregularities on his promotion opportunity was, in our
view, essentially harmless. We therefore agree with the
recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale expressed as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.
Therefore, 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 17 January 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
Ms. Carolyn J. Watkins, Member
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 May 2000, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Officer Selection Brief.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPOO, dated 27 September 2000.
Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, dated 18 October 2000.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 27 October 2000.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02152
He also requests promotion consideration by a Special Selection Board (SSB) by the CY00 board. He was advised by personnel since his duty title on his Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) was correct, the board would have the correct information. Also, since the applicant was aware of the error and knew the information had not been corrected, he could have written a letter to the board informing them of his missing duty title.
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates that the applicant is a rated officer who was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force on 7 Jun 86 and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on 21 Sep 86. An AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, dated 1 August 1997, documenting the applicant’s break in active duty service from 1 Jun 92 to 16 Apr 97, was...
Although the certificate was not in the applicant’s records, the board members saw the documentation (OSB, dated 15 Nov 00), reflecting that she was board certified (Exhibit C). The Officer Promotion and Appointment Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPOO, stated that eligible officers are provided an officer preselection brief (OPB) approximately 100 days prior to board convening date along with an instruction sheet that outlines how to correct discrepancies prior to the start of a promotion board. While...
At that time, he requested that the appropriate duty title be loaded into the personnel system. Although the OPB was received prior to the applicant reporting to his new duty station, he had sufficient time prior to the board to ensure his new duty information was updated and accurate. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR 01-01324 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under...
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided copies of his OSB, the board discrepancy report, AFCM (2OLC) citation, orders awarding him the AFAM and AFCM (1OLC), AFCM (1OLC) certificate and citation, and electronic mail (e-mail) regarding a decoration status. Regarding the applicant’s belief that the AFAM citation should have been included in his OSR in time for the board, DPPPA indicated that the decoration closeout date was 10 Jun 99, and the special order was published on 19 Mar 00. ...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00931 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Officer Selection Record (OSR) for the CY00A Colonel Medical Corps (MC) Central Selection Board be corrected to include her certificate of board certification and documentation to show her qualification as a flight surgeon. ...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03046 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The duty history portion of his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) for the CY00A (24 January 2000) major board reflect the following changes: the 23 June 1991 entry should reflect an entry of “Navigator” vice “Nacigator”; the 14 December 1991...
Although the applicant could not correct the error in the HAF files, she could have identified the problem to the board members in a letter. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant stated that she and her superiors exercised reasonable diligence in discovering the error, and over the course of the next year, they attempted to correct the error with SAF Manpower,...
A copy of the complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a copy of his CY00A OSR and now asserts that his OPR closing 31 May 00 should have been included in his OSR for the promotion board’s consideration. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE...
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...