RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00477
INDEX CODE: 100.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 August 2007
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His record, to include the Meritorious Service Medal, Fourth Oak Leaf
Cluster (MSM, 4OLC), be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB)
for the Calendar Year 2004C (CY04C) Chaplain Colonel Central Selection
Board.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Although his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) listed a total of five
MSMs, the MSM, 4OLC, narrative was not in Officer Selection Record
(OSR) when it met the CY04C board. Inclusion of this important
narrative covering a period ending 30 June 2004, may have made a
positive difference in scoring his promotion record and possibly
resulted in his promotion selection.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the
certificate/citation to accompany award of the MSM, 4 OLC, a
discrepancy memo for the CY04C Col Board and his personal statement.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
lieutenant colonel. On 26 May 2004, he was awarded the MSM,4 OLC, for
meritorious service during the period 2 August 2001 to 30 June 2004.
He was considered and not selected for promotion by the CY04C Col
Board that convened on 6 December 2004.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied and states, in part,
that applicant has not demonstrated he exercised due diligence in
maintaining his record. As indicated in the governing Air Force
Instruction, an SSB should not be convened if, by exercising
reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error or
omission and could have taken correction action before the originally
scheduled board convened. Regardless, although the MSM, 4 OLC,
citation was not in the applicant’s records when reviewed by the CY04C
Col Board, the board members knew of its existence since it was listed
on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB). In addition, applicant’s
records contained a discrepancy letter concerning the absence of the
MSM, 4 OLC, citation. Therefore, the board was aware of the
decoration and it was factored into the promotion selection process.
More importantly, the achievements noted in the citation were also
mentioned in the corresponding performance reports. As such,
AFPC/DPPPO is not convinced the absence of the citation contributed to
his promotion nonselections.
The AFPC/DPPPO evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, was forwarded to
the applicant on 14 April 2006, for review and comments, within 30
days. However, 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 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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion 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
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 25 May 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Feb 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 7 Apr 06, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 06.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00714
It is the officer’s responsibility to ensure the accuracy of his record at AFPC prior to the board convening date, not after he has been nonselected for promotion. The Air Force had a duty to present to the promotion board an accurate record. Applicant contends that his records were not fairly assessed because the Air Force failed to correct his OSB after proper notification of the errors, and the citation for the MSM 2/OLC was missing from his OSR, which prevented his record from being...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00819
His Officer Promotion Brief (OPB) be updated to reflect the “C” prefix for his Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC), the Armed Force Reserve Medal (AFRM) and his overseas duty be reflected in his overseas history on the OPB. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states a corrected version of his MSM for the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02242
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial of applicant’s request for SSB consideration. In reference to the applicant contending that the OSB was missing his duty title entry as flight commander, DPPPO states that this error was discoverable and fixable if the applicant would have carefully reviewed his Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) prior to the board. Therefore, the majority of the Board recommends his record, to include an OSB reflecting his...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00676
The officer is responsible for ensuring the accuracy of his record at HQ AFPC prior to the board convening date, not after he has been nonselected for promotion. A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/DPPPO evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provides documents of his efforts to correct other errors in his records before the CY05A board convened. We agree with the...
The applicant contends the citations for the MSM, 1OLC and 2OLC were missing from his OSR. Although the citations were not present in his OSR for the board’s review, the selection board had his entire officer selection record (including the OSB reflecting the MSM, 1OLC and 2OLC) at their disposal during promotion consideration. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
Even though the MSM (2OLC) citation and/or special order were not on file in the OSR when the board convened, the board members knew of its existence as evidenced by the entry on the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and presence of the discrepancy report. Accordingly, the MSM (4OLC) was not required to be on file for the board, nor could it have been since the special order awarding the decoration had not been published when the board convened. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00362
The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit B. ARPC/DPPPO recommends the Board deny the applicant’s request for SSB consideration. It is the officer’s responsibility to ensure the accuracy of his record prior to the board convening date, not after he has been nonselected for promotion. After reviewing the evidence of record, we note the applicant’s OSR did not contain a copy of his DMSM citation, nor did his OSB reflect his award of his AAM/8OLC at the time the board convened.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02072
DPPPO states although the applicant‘s citations were not on file in his OSR when the board convened, the board members knew of its existence as evidenced by the entry in the decoration section of his OSB. Applicant requests that his assignment duty history entry dated 28 Sep 03, on his CY04A OSB be deleted and that the citations for his AFAM and AFAM (1OLC) be included in his CY04A OSR; and that he receive SSB consideration. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-02072 MEMORANDUM...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00530
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00530 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 AUGUST 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Officer Selection Record (OSR) prepared for the Calendar Year 2004B (CY04B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board be corrected to include her Officer Performance Report (OPR),...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02498
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was placed at a competitive disadvantage at the calendar year 2000 Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (P0500A), In-the-Promotion Zone (IPZ) for two reasons: (1) A discrepancy in the computerized portion of his OSR, known as the Air Force Officer Selection Brief erroneously indicated to the promotion board that he had been awarded only one MSM when, in fact, he had been awarded two; this...