Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0100069
Original file (0100069.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00069

            COUNSEL:  WILLIAM M. FERRIS

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the Reserve grade of colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was highly recommended for promotion to the rank  of  colonel,  Air
Force Reserve, by his supervisor and commanding  officer,  the  former
Director, Defense Intelligence  Agency,  in  a  Letter  of  Evaluation
closing 30 Mar 78.

He was also highly recommended for promotion to the rank of colonel by
his former Air Force Reserve  supervisor  and  commander,  the  former
Military Assistant to the Assistant Chief of Staff,  Intelligence,  in
an Officer Effectiveness Report (OER) closing 30 Apr 78.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, copies of the LOE  and  OER,  extracts  from  his  military
personnel records, and other  documents  associated  with  the  matter
under review.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Available documentation indicates that the  applicant,  an  Air  Force
Reserve officer, was relieved from his current assignment, assigned to
the Retired Reserve, and his name was placed on the United States  Air
Force (USAF) Reserve  Retired  List  on  8 Jul  79  in  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel.  He retired in that grade effective 20 Aug 80.  He
was credited with 30 years,  7 months,  and  6  days  of  satisfactory
Federal service for retirement.

AFPC/DPD indicated that the applicant was considered  and  nonselected
for promotion to the grade of colonel on six different occasions.   He
was last considered and nonselected for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
colonel by the Fiscal Year  1979  (FY79)  Air  Force  Reserve  Colonel
Overall  Vacancy  Promotion  Board.   When  he  was   considered   and
nonselected by the board, his Officer Selection Record (OSR) contained
the AF Form 77a (Letter of Evaluation) closing 30 Mar 78  and  the  AF
Form 707 (Officer Effectiveness Report) closing 30 Apr 78 recommending
him for promotion to the grade of colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB reviewed this application and recommended denial.  A complete
copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  30
Mar 01 for review and response (Exhibit C).

By  letter,  dated  25  Apr  01,  the  applicant  requested  that  his
application be temporarily withdrawn (Exhibit D).

By application, dated 13 Aug 02,  the  applicant  provided  additional
documentary evidence for the Board’s consideration, 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 not  timely  filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice.  After careful  consideration  of
applicant's request and the available  evidence  of  record,  we  find
insufficient evidence of error  or  injustice  to  warrant  corrective
action.  The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinion  appear
to be based on the evidence of record and  have  not  been  adequately
rebutted by  applicant.   Absent  persuasive  evidence  applicant  was
denied rights to which  entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not
followed, or appropriate standards were not applied, we find no  basis
to disturb the existing record.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of   the   issues   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 01-
00069 in Executive Session on 7 Nov 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
      Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Dec 00, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 16 Mar 01.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 30 Mar 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, applicant, dated 25 Apr 01.
    Exhibit E.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Aug 02, w/atchs.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00171

    Original file (BC-2003-00171.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since 1990, the applicant has successfully been promoted to the grade of captain (where the missing OPR would have been the second OPR from the top) and to major (the missing OPR would have been the seventh from the top). According to ARPC/DPB, selection boards must use the “whole person” concept to arrive at a decision for promotability of any officer. A complete copy of the ARPC/DPB evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003060

    Original file (0003060.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His personnel record did not contain his OPR closing 31 May 00 and was not a matter of record to compliment his promotion recommendation. In support of his appeal, the applicant provided copies of his OPR closing 31 May 00 and his Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF). Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01320

    Original file (BC-2005-01320.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the effective date of his promotion to lieutenant colonel was delayed to 11 Sep 01, his date of rank (DOR) was back-dated to 6 Jun 01, within the OPR reporting period. The applicant contends that his nonselection for promotion to colonel by the FY05 colonel selection board was due to the fact his record as it met the board, only contained one OPR reflecting service in the grade of lieutenant colonel. After careful review of the applicant's submission and the available evidence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02610

    Original file (BC-2004-02610.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02610 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His nonselection for promotion to the grade of major by the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Line and Health Professions Major Selection Board be set aside, and he be reconsidered for promotion at a later date. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01058

    Original file (BC-2003-01058.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to a system failure to notify his wing of his promotion eligibility, a Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) was not staffed and forwarded to ARPC prior to the 20 Dec 02 deadline. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that he meets the eligibility requirements for promotion consideration by the FY04 PV board. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03669

    Original file (BC-2002-03669.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    OPRs are considered “late” if they are not received and filed in the OSR 90 days after the closeout date. The applicant’s Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) was present in his record. We note that the applicant’s OPR closing 30 Apr 02 was not required to be on file when the applicant was considered for promotion by the FY03 Line and Health Professions Lieutenant Colonel Position Vacancy Selection Board, which convened on 24 Jun 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01430

    Original file (BC-2004-01430.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was considered and nonselected for promotion to the grade of colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the FY01 and FY03 USAFR Line and NonLine Colonel’s Promotion Selection Boards. If a late OPR negatively impacts a selection board, HQ ARPC/DPB evaluates the record for SSB consideration, provided the officer requests a review of his/her selection record and an error (the late OPR) is established. DPB states that feedback and PRF preparation do not depend on an OPR being...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01622

    Original file (BC-2002-01622.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    All LEAD officers display the current PAS of assignment (which is active duty), the file from which the data is obtained (“BA” meaning active duty officer), an identifier showing “AGR” (also indicating full-time active duty), and 239 active duty training points in the current retirement/retention (R/R) year (“PT SINCE: 13 Feb 01” at the bottom of the OSB). In addition, after reviewing the applicant’s OPRs, we noted that the assignment history section of the contested OSB contains...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100908

    Original file (0100908.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The citation for the Meritorious Service Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM, 2OLC) was not in his officer selection record (OSR) and the MSM, 4OLC was not reflected on his officer selection brief (OSB) when he was considered for promotion to colonel by the CY00A central colonel selection board. By SO G-GA82, dated 30 May 00, he was awarded the MSM, 4OLC. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00088

    Original file (BC-2005-00088.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 1 April 2004, the AFBCMR considered and, by a majority vote, recommended approval of applicant's request for removal of the OPR, closing 10 February 2002, LOCs, LOA, UIF, and all references thereto, from his records and SSB consideration, with his corrected record. As to the Board’s previous decision, DPB indicates that HQ ARPC complied (all available references to the LOC, LOA, UIF and the OPR were removed from the applicant’s record), and awarded SSB in lieu of the FY03 and FY04 Line...