Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02098
Original file (BC-2006-02098.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02098
            INDEX CODE:  131.01, 107.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  15 JANUARY 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be  given  Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)  consideration  by  the
Calendar Year  2003A  (CY03A)  Major  Central  Selection  Board,  with
inclusion of his officer performance report  (OPR)  that  covered  the
period 23 March 2002 through 22 March 2003.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The promotion board did not grade his complete record-a full  year  of
performance was left out;  therefore,  they  did  not  have  the  most
complete picture from which to judge his future potential based on his
past performance. Though it is the responsibility of the senior  rater
to determine what to put in a performance  recommendation  form  (PRF)
and what to focus  on,  it  was  his  responsibility  to  provide  all
pertinent information for him to make the  decision.  Because  he  was
told erroneous information, his senior rater did not have all his past
awards and they were not included in his PRF. Again, the board did not
have the most accurate portrayal of his performance to judge.

In support of his application,  the  applicant  submitted  a  personal
letter, emails, letters of congratulation, and draft comments.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Reserves  in  the  grade  of
captain.  The applicant has two nonselections to the grade of major by
the CY03A and CY03B Major Central Selection Boards.

The applicant's OPR that closed out on 22 March 2003 was not  required
to be on file until 22 May 2003.

Applicant’s OPR profile is listed below.

                 PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

                   19 Feb 99      Meets Standards
                   19 Jun 99      Meets Standards
                    9 Jun 00      Meets Standards
                    6 Oct 00      Education/Training Report
                    9 Jun 01      Meets Standards
                   22 Mar 02      Meets Standards
                   22 Mar 03      Meets Standards
                   10 Oct 03      Meets Standards

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial. In support of his appeal, the  applicant
provided an email from Col B__ who states that it was  his  intent  to
have the 5 May 2003 OPR filed  in  his  record  prior  to  the  board.
However, he is not listed as an evaluator nor does  he  indicate  what
efforts he made to expedite the processing of the OPR and to ensure it
arrived in time for the  board.  The  applicant  has  not  provided  a
supporting  statement  from  any  of  his  raters.  In  addition   the
applicant's OPR was not signed by his rater and additional rater until
30 April 2003. The reviewer signed on 5 May 2003,  the  same  day  the
CY03A board convened. The omission of this report  was  not  an  error
since it was not equired to be filed in his OSR for the CY03A board.

AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
18 August 2006, for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   After  thoroughly  reviewing
the applicant's complete submission, we are  not  persuaded  that  the
applicant's records warrant reconsideration by an SSB for promotion to
the grade of major.  In this regard,  the  Board  notes  the  OPR  was
processed within the time allowed by AFI 36-2406 and that it  was  not
required to be on file at the time the  CY03A  major  promotion  board
convened on     5 May  2003.   The  applicant  has  not  provided  any
evidence from his rating chain that it was their intent that  the  OPR
be placed in his records prior to the  CY03A  board  or  that  it  was
unduly  delayed  or  failed  to  be  processed  in  a  timely  manner.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the  Air
Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our 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
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 probable  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 Docket  Number  BC-2006-
02098 in Executive Session on 17 October 2006, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
                 Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2006-
02098 was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Jul 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 8 Aug 06.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Aug 06.





      CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01104

    Original file (BC-2006-01104.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant received his PRF 30 days prior to the board convening and failed to take action to correct his record and was again nonselected. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 30 Jun 06, for review and comment within 30 days. We note a Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) is prepared by a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01425

    Original file (BC-2004-01425.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, Air Force policy does not allow for decorations with close out dates or approval dates after the convening of the board to be filed in a member’s record. In addition, because of the closeout date of his MSM (2OLC) (7 August 2003), there is no basis to favorably consider his request for consideration of this award by the CY02B and CY03A lieutenant colonel selection boards. Finally, since there is no indication in the available evidence that the applicant’s record of performance...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02360

    Original file (BC-2003-02360.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his request, the applicant has provided letters of support from his senior rater and management level review president (MLR), a signed revised PRF, and a copy of his officer selection record (OSR) reviewed by the CY02B lieutenant colonel promotion board. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request for consideration for promotion by SSB for the CY02B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03821

    Original file (BC-2003-03821.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request that her PRF prepared for the CY03A board be replaced with a reaccomplished PRF. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to provide consideration for promotion to the grade of major by a Special...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00053

    Original file (BC-2007-00053.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    When he was considered by the CY03A and two subsequent boards, his record included an Officer Performance Report (OPR) with inappropriate statements. Although applicant has provided a memo from his SR, dated 28 October 2004, which contained the statement “The OPR as originally written had the strong potential to unfairly prejudice a SR and promotion board in a negative fashion, and did not accurately reflect your true potential.”, this statement is generic in nature in that he refers to “a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01930

    Original file (BC-2004-01930.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01930 INDEX CODE: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Selection Brief be corrected and his record, to include his most recent Officer Performance Report (OPR) (1 September 2002-13 June 2003), be considered by Special Selection Board (SSB) for promotion to Lieutenant Colonel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02191

    Original file (BC-2006-02191.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2003-01791

    Original file (BC-2003-01791.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPE states the applicant has not provided any evidence as to what actions he took to inform his senior rater of a possible violation of the AFI. The applicant has not provided any documentation from his senior rater or from the management level review board president (MRLB) in support of his request for special selection board consideration, nor has he provided a new PRF for consideration by...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02524-2

    Original file (BC-2005-02524-2.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his original PRF for the CY04A board; new endorsed PRF; a copy of the Management-Level Review letter of concurrence, dated 25 Apr 06; a copy of AFBCMR Recommendation, dated 9 Mar 06, and an extract from the AFI 36-2401, para A1.6., dated 20 Feb 04, Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPE reviewed this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03654

    Original file (BC-2003-03654.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...