Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | Bc-2006-01578
Original file (Bc-2006-01578.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01578
            INDEX NUMBER:  136.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  Yes


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  22 Nov 07


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The results of the CY06 Line of the  Air  Force  Force  Shaping  Board
results be corrected to show that he was selected for retention.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes his records were in  error  because  he  is  aware  of  an
individual that was stratified below him in all areas on  the  AF  IMT
3538, “Retention Recommendation” form, who was retained.  He and  this
individual met the same board under the same core Air Force  Specialty
Code (AFSC).  He had 10 more points  in  decorations  than  the  other
individual, their deployment status was the same, and  they  both  re-
cored from the same AFSC.  Given the results of the board,  a  mistake
must have taken place.

In support of his appeal, applicant provides a copy of  the  retention
recommendation prepared on him.  The applicant’s complete  submission,
with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is  serving  on  active  duty  in  the  grade  of  first
lieutenant.  He was considered and not selected for retention  by  the
L9906A Force Shaping Board (10 Apr 06).   According  to  the  Military
Personnel Data System (MilPDS) he has a  current  date  of  separation
(DOS) of 28 Sep 06.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRF  recommends  denial  of   the   applicant’s   request   for
consideration for retention by special selection board  for  the  CY06
Force  Shaping  Board.   They  note  that  each  officer’s   Retention
Recommendation Form (RRF) was written by the first colonel or GS-15 in
their chain and endorsed by their senior rater.  The senior rater  was
limited to one standardized statement in which they rank  ordered  all
of their officers within the eligible officers in their year group and
core AFSC.  Stratification by a senior rater is only one aspect of the
retention recommendation.  The members of the board are empanelled  as
an independent body to factor the senior rater’s  stratification  into
their assessment of the officer’s record.  If based on  the  Secretary
of the Air Force’s  guidance  to  use  the  whole-person  concept,  an
officer is deemed by the board’s collective evaluation not to  be  the
best qualified for retention in  the  Air  Force,  they  will  not  be
retained  regardless  of  the   senior   rater’s   recommendation   or
stratification.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO also recommends denial of the  applicant’s  request.   They
concur  with  the  findings  and  recommendations  as  put  forth   by
AFPC/DPPRF.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
14 Jul 06 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a  response
has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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
offices of primary responsibility and adopt  their  rationale  as  the
primary 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.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.  Therefore,
the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_______________________________________________________________

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 Docket  Number  BC-2006-
01578 in Executive Session on 24 August 2006, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
      Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
      Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 May 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memo, AFPC/DPPRF, dated 2 Jun 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jul 06.




                                   MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                   Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01578

    Original file (BC-2006-01578.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01578 INDEX NUMBER: 136.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 Nov 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The results of the CY06 Line of the Air Force Force Shaping Board results be corrected to show that he was selected for retention. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01656

    Original file (BC-2007-01656.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPRF recommends denial. The complete DPPRF evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03006

    Original file (BC-2008-03006.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The HQ AFPC/DPSOS’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/JA recommends the applicant’s nonselection for retention by the 6 June 2006 FSB be set aside and that she be considered by a special FSB selection board utilizing a corrected RRF. However, the majority of the Board believes that thorough and fitting relief in this case would be to correct her records to show that she was selected for retention by the 10 Apr 06 FSB, and to reinstate her to active duty. Accordingly, the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01772

    Original file (BC-2006-01772.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support, the applicant provides a reaccomplished RRF and a statement from her senior rater, the Assistant Vice Chief of Staff (HQ USAF/CVA), who requests the contested RRF be replaced with the reaccomplished form including the WHSA duty information. The AF/CVA Protocol Office indicated the applicant “no longer worked there,” was on terminal leave, and had been selected for the WHSA position after the CY06A FSB convened. HQ AFPC/DPPRF noted the applicant’s submission did not indicate...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03299

    Original file (BC-2006-03299.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was promised $22,347 minus taxes as separation pay and her separation orders authorized the pay. U.S. Code, Title 10, Section 1174, Separation pay upon involuntary discharge or release from active duty, (c)(1)(a), states members must have completed 6 or more years of active service immediately before release to be entitled to separation pay. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01579

    Original file (BC-2006-01579.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01579 INDEX CODE: 131.01 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 27 NOVEMBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Officer Selection Record (OSR) be corrected to reflect her Acquisition Professional Development Program (APDP) Level I Certification (10 December 2003), and ADPD Level II...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00151

    Original file (BC-2013-00151.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Moreover, we are not persuaded by the evidence that the stratification statements contained in the PRF reviewed by the CY06 Lt Col Promotion board were not consistent with his complete record of performance. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01736

    Original file (BC-2006-01736.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Due to an anomaly with some records during the CY06 FSB, 192 of the lieutenants who were not selected for retention will have their records reconsidered by a special board scheduled to convene 26 June 2006. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the absence of the decoration is not an error since the orders awarding it were not published until after the CY06 FSB...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03956

    Original file (BC 2007 03956.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial of the applicant’s request to reaccomplish his 10 Jun 06 OPR, his 15 Dec 06 OPR, and his RRF for the L9907B/1C881 Force Shaping Board. However, giving the applicant the benefit of the doubt, and if directed by the AFBCMR, they would agree to changing the word “shows” to “showed,” on the Dec 06 OPR; however, whether the change is made or not, it does not make the report...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01336

    Original file (BC-2006-01336.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01336 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 Nov 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The recoupment action of the Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) be terminated. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this...