RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01126
INDEX CODE: 107.00, 131.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 OCTOBER 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Air Medal (AM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC), be upgraded to the
Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC); and, that he be considered for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection
Board (SSB), with his corrected record.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should be awarded the DFC for a rescue mission he planned,
developed and executed while assigned to the 20th Operations Squadron
during Operation ENDURING FREEDOM on 14 January 2002. As the aircraft
commander, he received the AM whereas the copilot on the same said
mission received the DFC. Traditionally, the aircraft commander and
flight lead receives the highest decoration for a crew or formation
action. An award to the copilot ahead of the commander defies logic,
reason and Air Force tradition. The text of the draft DFC citation he
has provided differs significantly from his AM citation, but is
substantially the same as the one submitted for the copilot. The only
insight he has to resolve the differences comes from the copilot’s
statement. He was the recommending official for the copilot’s DFC
recommendation. In addition, a DFC would have changed his promotion
record significantly; therefore, his corrected record should be
reconsidered by a promotion board.
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, AM
1OLC citation and order, draft DFC citation, email from copilot and
AFTO Form 781 (AFORMS AIRCREW/MISSION FLIGHT DATA DOCUMENT). The
applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS)
reveals the applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date
(TAFMSD) as 28 May 1986. He is currently serving on active duty in
the grade of major, with an effective date and date of rank of 1
February 1998. He received {5} Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) in
the grade of major, in which the overall evaluations were “Meets
Standards.” The applicant has four nonselections to the grade of
lieutenant colonel by the CY01B (5 November 2001), CY02B (12 November
2002), CY03A (8 July 2003), and CY04B (12 July 2004) Lieutenant
Colonel Central Selection Boards. He has an established date of
separation (DOS) of 31 May 2006.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application for upgrade of the awarded AM
to the DFC be approved based on the supporting documentation provided
by the applicant to substantiate that, as the aircraft commander, he
planned, developed, coordinated and lead the rescue mission for which
the copilot received a DFC. DPPPR states that, although the AM was
awarded for his actions on 14 January 2002, the special order
announcing its approval was published on 9 January 2004. As such, the
AM and DFC (if the upgrade is approved) did not exist for the CY01B,
CY02B and CY03A lieutenant colonel selection boards. Therefore, if
the Board approved upgrading the AM to the DFC, the Chief, Officer
Promotions and Selective Continuation Branch, recommends SSB
consideration only by the CY04B selection board, with inclusion of the
upgraded decoration. The HQ AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on
15 May 2005 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 timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. After reviewing the applicant’s
submission and the evidence of record, we are persuaded that relief is
warranted. In this respect, we are in agreement with the opinion and
recommendation of the appropriate Air Force office, HQ AFPC/DPPPR,
that the evidence supports upgrade of the applicant’s awarded Air
Medal to the Distinguished Flying Cross. We are also of the opinion
that there was an excessive delay in awarding the initial decoration.
In view of the above and in order to resolve any injustice to the
applicant, we recommend that his records be corrected in the following
manner.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that, on 10 November 2002,
he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) rather than the
Air Medal (AM), First Oak Leaf Cluster, for distinguished service on
14 January 2002.
It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the
grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the
Calendar Year 2002B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, with
inclusion of the DFC, and any subsequent boards for which the above
award was not a matter of record.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 12 July 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Member
Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Mar 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 3 May 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 May 05.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AFBCMR BC-2005-01126
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 APPLICANT ted to show that, on 10 November 2002, he
was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) rather than the Air
Medal (AM), First Oak Leaf Cluster, for distinguished service on 14
January 2002.
It is further directed that he be considered for promotion to
the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the
Calendar Year 2002B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, with
inclusion of the DFC, and any subsequent boards for which the above
award was not a matter of record.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-02181
He believes the absence of this information prejudiced his consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel. He states the Air Force awarded him two DFC (Basic) awards in 1992 and later claimed that one of the DFCs had not been awarded until after his colonel selection board. Although the panel has recommended the applicant’s records, to include two Air Medals (AMs) and a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), be considered by an SSB for the CY01B board, they do not recommend the DFC, 1 OLC,...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02191
In support of his request, applicant provided emails to/from his senior rater, a statement from the senior rater, an email from the HQ AFPC nonselection counselor, drafts of the OPR, and his previous appeals to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB). Col B-- was the senior rater of the CY01B PRF and the contested CY02B PRF, as well as the rater of the contested 16 Feb 02 OPR. He provided nothing documenting Col B-- directed him to complete his own PRF or OPR.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01181
Applicant’s OSB for the CY02B board dated 4 November 2002 incorrectly shows the “M” prefix on her “Duty” AFSC under “Assignment History.” Further, applicant submitted copies of her Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) dated 23 July 2003 for the CY02B board which indicates a duty title on 4 February 2001 as “Ambulatory Procedures/Nurse Anesthetist Chief” which was not shown on her OSB when meeting the CY02B board. Based on AFPC/DPAMF2’s advisory and the evidence provided, they recommend SSB...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01113
The applicant failed to exercise reasonable diligence in maintaining his record prior to the CSBs; therefore, that office recommends denial of the applicant’s request for SSB consideration with the corrected DAFSC. Applicant’s Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and Officer Performance Report (OPR) for the period 22 May 1992 to 10 May 1993, did not reflect his correct Duty Air Force Specialty Code S1555E at the time he was considered for promotion by the CY00A, CY01B, CY02B and the CY03A...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00459
In regards to the applicant’s request to change the DAFSC on his PRF viewed by the CY02B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, they note that while it was appropriate for the ERAB to correct the applicant’s DAFSC on his OPR, it is not appropriate to make changes to the PRF. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01843
By amendment at Exhibit G, the promotion recommendation form (PRF) prepared for consideration by the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board be removed from his records and replaced with a reaccomplished PRF containing definitely promote DP recommendation. On 16 October 2002, the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denied applicant’s request to substitute the contested OPR and the PRF for the CY01B Central Selection Board. Their evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01728
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01728 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Selection Brief (OSB) for the CY02B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board be corrected to reflect his degree of Master of Business Administration (MBA) and that he receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00402
The reason for this is: 1) to advise the ratee of the senior rater’s promotion recommendation and 2) to provide the ratee an opportunity to point out any errors of fact to the senior rater so they may be corrected prior to the CSB. The applicant has failed to provide supporting documents of a material error in the report. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request for consideration for promotion by...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01020
If the wing commander or imposing commander does not request direct removal of the Article 15 from the OSR, the member may petition AFPC/DPPBR for removal of the Article 15 from their OSR, but only after one IPZ or APZ promotion consideration. He feels the Article 15 should have been removed prior to his records meeting the (CY01B) central lieutenant colonel selection board as demonstrated by his commander’s decision to remove it a year later. We note that AFI 36- 2608 states that record...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03654
This information was on his Officer Performance Report (OPR) for the period ending 28 September 2000, which met the CY00A selection board. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPO states they reviewed the findings in the HQ AFPC/DPPPE advisory and have nothing further to add. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...