RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00740
INDEX CODE: 131.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be considered by Special Selection Board (SSB) for reconsideration
of all points earned in scoring eligibility for promotion to
Lieutenant Colonel.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The board did not consider participation points in the scoring of his
record. Applicant accrued 153 points in 1999-2001 and 103 points in
2000-2001. He contends also that another officer in his unit, who did
not participate during the previous year, was promoted.
His submission, with the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) in question, is
attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently a member of the Arizona Air National Guard
(AZ ANG) and is serving as a Major. He was considered, but not
selected, by the FY 03 Air National Guard Line and Non-Line Lieutenant
Colonel Selection Board, which convened at HQ ARPC on 22 April 2002.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPB reviewed this application and recommended denial. DPB states
that the applicant’s OSB in fact, did show the points he had accrued
over the previous two-year period. The board would have had access to
the information that the applicant contends they did not.
Additionally, DPB states that promotion boards take into account many
other factors when making their decision. DPB points out that the
applicant had not completed minimum Professional Military Education
(PME) requirements of Squadron Officer School (SOS) or Air Command and
Staff College (ACSC) that, they note, boards expect to see completed
at the Lt Col level. DPB states that there appears to be no errors in
the applicant’s record and therefore no grounds exist for appealing
his non-selection.
DPB’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4
April 2003 for review and comment 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 an error or injustice. Although the applicant
contends that the selection board did not see earned participation
points during the periods 1999 through 2000 and 2000 through 2001 the
available evidence indicates that the opposite is true and that the
selection board did have access to the cited information. The
comments provided by the Air Force appear to be accurate and we adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusions that the applicant
has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, 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 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 BC-
2003-00740 in Executive Session on 5 June 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Feb 03, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ ARPC/DPB, dated 27 Mar 03.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Apr 03.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2000-02455C
The Air Force evaluation stated that there were some errors in the applicant's record as it appeared before the selection boards in question and recommended to the Board that corrections be made to his Officer Selection Briefs (OSBs), he receive SSB consideration for the FY00 and FY01 boards, and if not selected by either board, he be considered for continuation by Special Review Board (SRB). The Board concurred with the recommendation of the Air Force evaluator and recommended that he...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03549
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03549 INDEX CODE 131.01 135.02 COUNSEL: No HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded 144 extension course institute (ECI) points, the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) for the Fiscal Year 2003 (FY03) Line and Health Professions Lt Colonel Position Vacancy (PV) Selection Board be replaced and he be...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01622
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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03774
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time he was considered for PV promotion, the citation to accompany the award of the MSM was missing from his selection record. In view of this, and since the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act does not provide ARPC the authority to hold Special Selection Boards (SSBs) for PV promotion boards, we recommend his records, to include the MSM citation, be considered for promotion to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03355
DPB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Regarding the timeliness issue, the applicant argues that the DD Form 149 states the relevant date for submitting a BCMR application is within three years of “…the date of discovery of the alleged error occurred.” He believes he is inside the three-year window as he received notification of his erroneous DOR on 1 October 2000 and signed his...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02848
He reviewed his record prior to the promotion board and at the time he had the understanding that his record was correct. After reviewing the evidence of record, we note that the applicant's PAFSC, as reflected on his OSB, was incorrect when he was considered for promotion by the FY03 major selection board. MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2002-02848 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...
His letters were available to selection boards and were, at the time of the boards, in his OSB. However, we do agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant’s officer selection briefs (OSBs) that met both promotion boards and the continuation board did in fact contain errors. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be...
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her senior raters were never contacted to prepare Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs) for the SRBs; she was never provided an opportunity to review her Officer Selection Brief (OSB) for the FY97 SRB; and, the OSB for the FY98 SRB was incomplete. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s states that...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02091
AFI 36-2504, paragraph 2.7 requires, among other things, that officers have an outstanding record with at least 50 points for a year of satisfactory service during the last full R/R year at the time of submission of the PRF to be considered by a PV promotion board. While the applicant met all the other requirements for consideration by the contested Board, he had not completed an R/R year as of either 18 Dec 09, or as of the date the Board convened on 1 Feb 10. Accordingly, we recommend...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01430
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...