RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03148
INDEX CODE: 131.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Assignment History Section of her Officer Selection Brief (OSB) be
corrected to reflect only one entry as an Assistant Staff Judge
Advocate at Carswell Air Force Base (AFB).
The Academic Education Section of her OSB be corrected to reflect that
she completed her master’s degree in 1988.
She be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion
to the grade of lieutenant colonel with her corrected record.
By amendment, the Assignment History Section of her OSB be corrected
to reflect the Command Level (CMD LVL) entry, with an effective date
of 27 Jul 98, as Numbered Air Force (NAF) versus Wing/Base (W/B).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Carswell AFB was her first Air Force assignment as a judge advocate
(JAG). She was there less than two years and held the position of an
assistant staff judge advocate the entire time. Based upon the fact
that her position title remained unchanged during her tour there, she
believes that only one entry should have been made under the
assignment history section of her OSB listing her as an assistant
staff judge advocate. The title “assistant staff judge advocate”
appropriately reflects the fact that a JAG is new and has minimal, if
any, supervisory responsibilities. It is the least prestigious of any
JAG title/position. Unfortunately, three additional entries were made
under this same section. Thus, when one looks at the assignment
history section, unless one specifically examines the effective date
of each entry, it appears as though she has spent almost half of her
JAG career as an assistant staff judge advocate as four of the nine
JAG assignment entries have her working as an assistant staff judge
advocate.
Since the year completed was not entered on the OSB, it appears as
though she did not complete her master’s degree.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provided an expanded
statement, and copies of her OSB, two Officer Performance Reports
(OPRs), and transcript.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates
that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
major, having been promoted to that grade on 1 May 96. Her Total
Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 6 Jan 85.
Applicant's Officer Effectiveness Report/Officer Performance Report
(OER/OPR) profile since 1989 follows:
PERIOD ENDING EVALUATION
28 Aug 89 Training Report
30 Jul 91 Training Report
30 Jul 92 Meets Standards
1 Jun 93 Meets Standards
1 Jun 94 Meets Standards
1 Jun 95 Meets Standards
1 Jun 96 Meets Standards
1 Jun 97 Meets Standards
1 Jun 98 Meets Standards
# 1 Jun 99 Meets Standards
1 Jun 00 Meets Standards
# Top Report at the time she was considered and nonselected for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY99B (30 Nov 99)
Lt Col Board.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Appeals and SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed this application and
recommended denial. DPPPA indicated that, based on the evidence
provided, they do not support promotion reconsideration. However, if
the AFBCMR finds in favor of the applicant, they pose no objection to
removal of the 1 Jan 92 entry on the OSB.
A complete copy of the DPPPA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a response and
which is attached at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 corrective action
regarding the “Assistant Staff Judge Advocate” entry, with an
effective date of 1 Jan 92, and the Command Level entry with an
effective date of 27 Jul 98, in the Assignment History Section of the
applicant’s OSB.
a. With regard to the “Assistant Staff Judge Advocate” entry on
the OSB with an effective date of 1 Jan 92, we note that this entry is
identical in every aspect to the 10 Oct 91 entry, which reflected the
applicant’s arrival at Carswell Air Force Base. Furthermore,
AFPC/DPPPA offers no objection to the removal of this particular
entry. In view of the above, we opine that the entry should be
removed from the applicant’s records, and so recommend.
b. Concerning the command level entry with an effective date of
27 Jul 98, after a review of the available evidence, to include the
applicant’s officer performance report (OPR) for the time period in
question, we believe that the entry should reflect the command level
as NAF. Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant’s records be
corrected to show the 27 Jul 98 entry as NAF.
4. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice concerning the remaining
portions of this application.
a. With regard to the applicant’s request for SSB consideration
with her corrected record, we do not believe that the recommended
changes to the record are sufficient to warrant placing her record
before an SSB. Therefore, in the absence of clear and convincing
evidence to support a determination that the applicant’s record before
the original selection board was so inaccurate or misleading that the
board was unable to make a reasonable decision concerning her
promotability in relationship to her peers, the applicant’s request
for SSB consideration is not favorably considered.
b. Concerning the applicant’s requests that her CY99B OSB be
amended in the Assignment History Section by removing the “Assistant
Staff Judge Advocate” entries with the effective dates of 1 Jun 92 of
8 Jul 92, and that the Academic Education Section of her OSB be
corrected to reflect she completed her master’s degree in 1988, we
agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of
primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, the applicant’s requests are 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 Officer Selection
Brief (OSB) prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year 1999B
(CY99B) Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 30 Nov 99, be
amended in the “Assignment History” Section by deleting the duty title
of “Assistant Staff Judge Advocate,” with an effective date of 1 Jan
92; and, be amended in the “Assignment History” Section to show the
Command Level (CMD LVL) as “Numbered Air Force” (NAF), with an
effective date of 27 Jul 98, rather than “Wing/Base” (W/B).
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 1 Mar 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
Mr. George Franklin, Member
Mr. Roger Willmeth, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Nov 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 6 Dec 00.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Dec 00.
Exhibit E. Letter, applicant, dated 29 Dec 00.
TERRY A. YONKERS
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-03148
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 Officer Selection
Brief (OSB) prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year 1999B
(CY99B) Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 30 Nov 99, be
amended in the “Assignment History” Section by deleting the duty title
of “Assistant Staff Judge Advocate,” with an effective date of 1 Jan
92; and, be amended in the “Assignment History” Section to show the
Command Level (CMD LVL) as “Numbered Air Force” (NAF), with an
effective date of 27 Jul 98, rather than “Wing/Base” (W/B).
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Assignment Procedures Section, AFPC/DPAPP1, reviewed the application and states that applicant’s request to have the command level block updated to reflect “CMHQ,” versus “NAF,” was approved and updated by the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) through an In-System Request (ISR) on 25 April 2000. There is no record provided to indicate that the request was approved in time to change the applicant’s record prior to the date the CY99B board convened. In fact,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01169 INDEX NUMBER:131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears the applicant is requesting that the command level for his current duty assignment on his officer selection brief (OSB) be corrected from W/B (wing/base) to CMHQ (major command headquarters) and that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The DAFSC with an effective date of 24 Aug 95, and the aeronautical/flying data on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) were in error. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Directorate of Assignments, AFPC/DPAIS1, reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant’s DAFSC of “W12B1Y” was consistent with the OPR on file. ...
On 30 Sep 98, the Board considered and denied applicant’s requests, concluding that since he received SSB consideration by the CY94A board with the corrected assignment history and was not selected for promotion, the Board was not persuaded that the same correction would enhance his record sufficiently to warrant promotion by the CY95B board. A complete copy of the ROP is attached at Exhibit H. On 27 Feb 99, the applicant requested reconsideration of his application and asks that his...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1997-01621
On 30 Sep 98, the Board considered and denied applicant’s requests, concluding that since he received SSB consideration by the CY94A board with the corrected assignment history and was not selected for promotion, the Board was not persuaded that the same correction would enhance his record sufficiently to warrant promotion by the CY95B board. A complete copy of the ROP is attached at Exhibit H. On 27 Feb 99, the applicant requested reconsideration of his application and asks that his...
However, if the decision is to grant the specific relief sought, the OPR closing out in October 1992 should reflect “Assistant Chief, Civil Law/Military Justice;” the OPR closing out in July 1993 should reflect “Assistant Chief, Military Justice;” and the OPR closing out in July 1994 should reflect “Chief, Civil Law.” The related duty titles in the personnel database would have to be changed as well. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
Or, in the alternative, correction of his OSB to reflect the 4. correct duty organization, command level, and academic education; his PRF be changed to a DP recommendation; and, that he be granted a Special Selection Board (SSB). AFBCMR 97-0 1 62 1 The AFBCMR granted the applicant a SSB by the CY94A lieutenant colonel board based on the information contained on the CY94A OSB. We note that the applicant received SSB consideration by the CY94A board with the corrected assignment history and...
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.
Had he properly reviewed his OPBs prior to either of his BPZ considerations, his record would have been accurate for his P0598B in-the-promotion zone consideration. A complete copy of the DPPPA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant indicated that he believes he is deserving of promotion and he is simply requesting that he be considered for promotion with accurate...
Therefore, we recommend his corrected record be considered by Special Selection Board for the CY94A board THE BOARD RECOMM ENDS THA T: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that: a. It is further recommended that his corrected record, to include an Officer Selection Brief reflecting the first entry under Assignment History as DAFSC "5153", CMD LVL \\W/B", and Organization "Airlift Wing", be considered for promotion to...