RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01264
INDEX CODE 131.03
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be promoted to the grade of colonel.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In reviewing his performance reports while writing his biography, he
was convinced he was erroneously passed over for promotion to colonel.
His reports were either outstanding or superior from 1964 to his
retirement in 1972. He does not believe his records went before the
promotion boards on several occasions. This was a gross miscarriage
of justice. He was not aware until recently he had an avenue for
filing a complaint.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant had enlisted time from 15 Jun 43 until 7 Sep 44, when he
was honorably discharged to accept a commission. He was commissioned
a 2nd lieutenant and entered active duty on 8 Sep 44. He held the
temporary grade of lieutenant colonel with a date of rank (DOR) of 19
Mar 62 and the permanent grade of lieutenant colonel with a DOR of 1
Aug 64.
Based on these DORs, HQ AFPC/DPPPO advised in their evaluation
(Exhibit C) the applicant was eligible to meet promotion boards to
colonel beginning in Jul 65 (temporary) and May 67 (permanent).
The applicant’s Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs) are provided at
Exhibit B. His last assignment was squadron commander of the 556
Reconnaissance Squadron at Yokota AB, Japan. The Selection Board
Secretariat dates for the temporary/permanent colonel promotion boards
that convened from 26 Jul 65 through 15 May 72 are stamped on the top
OERs of the selection records that met those boards. Of the 11 OERs
covering the applicant’s performance as a lieutenant colonel, three
have the highest ratings in both Section V, Overall Evaluation, and
Section VI, Promotion Potential. The majority of the OERs covering
his career do not have “firewalled” Rating Factors in Section III.
The applicant retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel on 1 Nov 72
after 29 years, 4 months and 16 days of active service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPO advises the applicant’s OERs reflect he met continuous
temporary/permanent promotion boards and there is no indication he
missed any colonel promotion boards. The primary objective of the
temporary promotion program was to meet authorized Air Force
requirements for active duty officers in specific grades. Temporary
promotions were made to serve the best interests of the Air Force, not
individual officers. Thus an officer was not promoted under the
program merely to fill an authorized quota or to “reward” him for long
and faithful service. Officers selected for promotion must have
demonstrated by their performance (as shown in their records) that,
beyond a reasonable doubt, they were capable of performing the duties
and assuming the responsibilities of a higher grade. The applicant
has not provided evidence indicating he missed promotion boards for
consideration to colonel. His records are well documented and there
is no indication, based on his DORs as a lieutenant colonel, that he
missed any promotion boards to colonel, either temporary or permanent.
Therefore, denial is recommended.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant takes great exception to the advisory opinion,
particularly to the rank of the author. He disagrees with the
advisory’s statement that promotions were not made to reward an
outstanding officer or to fill an authorized quota. He believes he
demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt he should have been promoted.
He does not believe the advisory author wrote, or read, the
evaluation. The applicant asserts he would have fired one of his
officers on the spot if a signed piece of paper like that had been
brought to him.
The applicant’s complete response is 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 a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not
persuaded he should be promoted to the grade of colonel. The
applicant appears to believe he could not possibly have been
considered for promotion to colonel because, if he had been, he would
have been selected. However, his assertions have not overcome the
reality reflected in his own records. The Selection Board Secretarial
dates stamped on the applicant’s performance reports reveal he met
continuous temporary colonel promotion boards from 26 Jul 65 through
15 May 72 and continuous permanent colonel promotion boards from 26
Jun 67 through 24 Apr 72. Competition for the limited number of
colonel slots is extremely intense and many good officers are not
selected. The applicant is entitled to his opinion, but that is
insufficient to compel us to set aside the decisions of several
promotion boards, which were much better positioned to assess the
competition at the time. In view of the above and absent persuasive
evidence to the contrary, the applicant has failed to sustain his
burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. Therefore,
we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 22 September 2004 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-01264 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 12 Aug 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Aug 04.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 29 Aug 04.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03067
4 INDEX CODE: 102.03, 131.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 APRIL 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he was selected for augmentation in the Regular Air Force and his record be considered for promotion to the grade of colonel in the primary zone. The AFBCMR has considered these previous cases: In an application dated 18 January 1965, the applicant, a captain,...
The AFBCMR has considered these previous cases: In an application dated 18 January 1965, the applicant, a captain, made the following request: The AF Form 77, USAF Officer Effectiveness Report (OER), for the period 1 August 1963 - 31 May 1964 be removed from his records. In an application dated 13 May 1972, the applicant, a major, made the following requests: a. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01781
According to HQ AFPC/DPPPO’s advisory opinion at Exhibit F, the applicant was considered for the grade of colonel by the following promotion boards: 20 Jun 60 Permanent Colonel (Regular) 12 Jun 61 Regular Colonel 27 Nov 61 HQ USAF Temporary Colonel 11 Jun 62 Regular Colonel 3 Dec 62 Temporary Colonel Nomination 10 Jun 63 Regular Colonel 8 Jul 63 Temporary Colonel Nomination, FY64 14 Sep 64 Central Temporary Colonel, FY65 24 May 65 Regular Colonel 13 Sep 65 Central Temporary Colonel, FY66 20...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 01-01765 INDEX CODE 131.10 102.03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be afforded a special records review regarding his promotability to the grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC) on the Aug 67 promotion cycle and he be promoted retroactively to LTC, or at least to LTC in the Retired...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2002-01061
His statement from the recorder of many promotion boards states the board members relied heavily on the AF Forms 705 in determining whom they recommended for promotion. The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit T. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: We have thoroughly reviewed the evidence of record and considered the weight and relevance of the additional documentation provided by the applicant, and whether or...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01016
He was not involved, but his base commander downgraded his OER because he was on the staff of the local commander. He received a corrected statement; however, by that time the promotion board had already met. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response dated June 8, 2006, the applicant disagreed with the Air Force findings and recommendations.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03840
On 14 Aug 02, the Board considered and denied an application pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 9 Jul 93 through 22 Aug 94 be declared void and removed from his records; his OPR rendered for the period 23 Aug 94 through 15 Jul 95 be declared void and removed from his records; his PRF prepared for consideration by the CY96A Central Major Selection Board be declared void and removed from his records; his PRF...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02740
DPPPEP concedes there were numerous changes in reporting officials; however, no procedural errors were found in the reports on file in his master personnel record and, based on the information available, DPPPEP concludes there were no gaps in his records when he met the FY77B Temporary Captains Selection Board in July 1976. Officially, the record was in compliance with the governing regulations and no gaps existed when the record met the board. Further, DPPPO can find no gaps in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04096
He is now requesting reinstatement to active duty as a follow-on to his selection for promotion. The Board accepts the recommendation of the Air Force that he should be reinstated to active duty based on his selection for promotion. Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00826
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00826 INDEX NUMBER: 131.00 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 Sep 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion by special selection board (SSB) for the CY04B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board with the Officer Performance Report (OPR)...