Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200849
Original file (0200849.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00849
            INDEX CODE:  111.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Education/Training Report (TR), rendered for the period 2  Jun  92
through 27 Sep 93, be replaced with the  revised  TR  provided,  which
include squadron commander comments on his  performance  as  a  flight
commander.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His performance as  a  flight  commander  is  not  documented  on  any
training reports or Officer  Performance  Reports  (OPRs)  due  to  an
oversight during the base closure process at George AFB, CA.

In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of an AF  Form  77
(Supplemental Evaluation Sheet), rendered for  the  period  2  Jun  92
through 20 Aug  92,  and  a  revised  TR.   The  applicant’s  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Jun 83, the applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in the
Regular Air Force.  He was progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel, effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 99.

Applicant's profile for the last 10 reporting periods follows:

            Period Ending    Evaluation

                 20 Nov 91   Meets Standards (MS) - Captain
            #     1 Jun 92        MS
            * ## 27 Sep 93   Education/Training Report (TR)
            ###   8 Jun 94        TR
                  8 Jun 95        MS - Major
                  4 May 96        MS
            +     6 Jun 97        TR
            ++    6 Jun 98        MS
                  6 Jun 99        MS
                 14 May 00        MS - Lt Col

*  Contested TR

# Top report at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion Below-the-Promotion Zone (BPZ) to major by the CY92C Central
Major Selection Board, which convened on 7 Dec 92.

## Top report at the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion Below-the-Promotion Zone (BPZ) to major by the CY93B Central
Major Selection Board, which convened on 6 Dec 93.

### Top report  at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  selected  for
promotion In-the-Promotion Zone (IPZ) to major by  the  CY94A  Central
Major Selection Board, which convened on 22 Aug 94.

+ Top report at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to  lieutenant  colonel  by  the  CY97C  and  CY98B  Central
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, which convened on 21 Jul 97 and 1
Jun 98 respectively.

++ Top report at the time he was considered and selected for promotion
to  lieutenant  colonel  by  the  CY99A  Central  Lieutenant   Colonel
Selection Board, which convened on 19 Apr 99.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPE recommends the application be denied.  DPPPE stated that
the proposed Training Report  (TR)  does  not  mention  the  applicant
performing as a  flight  commander,  but  embellishes  on  information
previously addressed.  Based on the comments  in  Section  III,  Other
Comments, of the contested TR, the rater did obtain information  about
the previous assignment and it was considered when making the  initial
assessment and commented upon in the TR.  The retrospective  views  of
facts and circumstances, 7 years after the closeout of the AF Form 77,
Letter of  Evaluation,  do  not  overcome  the  presumption  that  the
original TR is correct and do not add new  information  that  was  not
previously known or addressed in previous evaluation reports.  The  HQ
AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  applicant  on
19 April 2002 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response
has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

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.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case.
However, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt the 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.   In
view of the above and absent sufficient 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 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 5 June 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                  Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
                  Mr. Michael Maglio, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, dated 10 Apr 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Apr 02.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102040

    Original file (0102040.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02040 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The 16th AF Intel Officer of the Year 1990 award comments contained in his 19 Jun 92 Training Report (TR) be removed and added to his 4 Mar 91 Officer Performance Report (OPR), and he receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03931

    Original file (BC-2002-03931.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03931 INDEX CODE: 111.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The duty title on his Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for the period 17 May 01 through 16 May 02, be corrected to read “Bioenvironmental Engineering Flight Commander” rather than “Bioenvironmental Engineer”; and, that he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803569

    Original file (9803569.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-03569 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY96A (4 Mar 96) Major Selection Board (P0496A), with inclusion of the corrected Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) provided; the citations...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-02883

    Original file (BC-2001-02883.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01894

    Original file (BC-2003-01894.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01894 (Case 2) INDEX CODE: 131.00, 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Referral Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for the period 5 July 1990 through 4 January 1991, be declared void and removed from her records. Prior to the applicant’s break in service, during the period...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-03039

    Original file (BC-2001-03039.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 Sep 99, applicant was notified of his commander's intent to impose nonjudicial punishment on him under Article 15, UCMJ. JAJM stated that a set aside should only be granted when the evidence demonstrates an error or a clear injustice. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPASC states that, if and only if, the applicant’s request is approved, they would recommend removal of the job entry titled, “Commander, HQ Squadron Section” from his duty history and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200645

    Original file (0200645.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Rather, the PRF is a reflection of the senior rater’s opinion of whether the applicant was ready at that time for promotion. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and furnished a response which is attached at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-00890

    Original file (BC-2002-00890.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year 1999B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board be voided and replaced with a reaccomplished PRF. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a detailed response and additional documentary evidence which are attached...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803124

    Original file (9803124.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02881

    Original file (BC-2003-02881.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of lieutenant colonel, with an effective date and date of rank of 1 February 2002, having been selected for promotion to that grade by the CY00A selection board. In view of the statements provided by the evaluators of the contested report, and having no basis to question their integrity, we conclude that the applicant’s records should be corrected to substitute the reaccomplished OPR, closing 26 May 1999, for the one currently in his...