RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00852
INDEX CODE: 111.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 SEPTEMBER 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The AF Form 475, Education/Training Report rendered on her for the period
18 Jun 95 through 12 Apr 96, be corrected to reflect “Distinguished
Graduate (DG).”
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Training Report (TR) is unjust because she was awarded DG for the
Fundamentals of Intelligence Course.
In support of her appeal, applicant provides a copy of her TR, dated 12 Apr
96 and her Fundamentals of Intelligence Course “Distinguished Graduate”
Certificate.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is presently serving on active duty in the grade of major
with a date of rank of 1 Oct 05. Her Total Active Federal Military Service
Date (TAFMSD) is 18 Jun 95. A resume of her OPRs and Training Reports
follow:
Closeout Date Overall Rating
* 12 Apr 96 Training Report (TR)
12 Apr 97 Meets Standards (MS)
12 Apr 98 MS
12 Apr 99 MS
12 Apr 00 MS
9 Aug 00 MS
7 Sep 01 TR
26 Mar 02 TR
17 May 02 TR
26 Mar 03 MS
26 Mar 04 MS
26 Mar 05 MS
26 Mar 06 MS
* Contested Report
The applicant did not file an appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401,
Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, 20 Feb 04.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to correct the TR.
The applicant attended a two-part course that consists of the Fundamentals
of Intelligence Course (19 weeks) and Intelligence Applications Officer
Course (14 weeks). The total course length is 34 weeks. The applicant
received DG for the Fundamentals of Intelligence Course; however, she was
not selected as DG for the Intelligence Applications Officer Course. The
evaluator accurately reflected the member’s DG status by commenting on the
fact in Section III of the TR. The fact is the member was DG for one
portion of the course not the overall course. To mark the DG block in
Section 3 of the TR would be unfair to all the commissioned officers who
were/were not selected as distinguished graduates for both courses.
Therefore, correcting the TR to mark the DG block of the contested TR would
make the applicant’s record inaccurate.
Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when
it becomes a matter of record. To effectively challenge a TR, it is
necessary to hear from all the members of the rating chain — not only for
support, but also for clarification/explanation. The applicant has failed
to provide any information/support from the rating chain on the contested
TR. It appears the reports were accomplished in direct accordance with
applicable regulations.
The DPPPEP complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 Apr
07 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 office of primary
responsibility 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 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-2007-
00852 in Executive Session on 5 June 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member
Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-
00852 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 18 Apr 07.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Apr 07.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03521
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03521 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 MAY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He believes this information should have been made available to his primary selection board in his records and in his PRF. In an application dated 29 January 2004, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01243
During his time as a student in the course, a personality conflict existed between himself and the course manager, and he believes the “optional comment” was added to the TR with the intent of reprisal for his withdrawing from the course. Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when it becomes a matter of record. Applicant contends a personality conflict existed between himself and his rater.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00682
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00682 INDEX CODE: 111.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 5 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The AF Form 475, Education/Training Report, dated 4 Oct 00, prepared on him while attending Squadron Office School (SOS), and all associated documents, be removed from his records. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00810
He accomplished a thorough review of his records prior to the O- 5 promotion board and the DG information was not in his records. DPSID states the applicant’s contested training report (TR) was signed by the evaluator on 5 January 2000 and has been a matter of record in the Automated Records Management System (ARMS) and the Officer Selection Record (OSR) since its filing date which was prior to the convening date of the applicable Central Selection Board (CSB) the applicant is contesting. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-04556
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04556 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Distinguished Graduate (DG) honors from Instructor Navigator (IN) School in June 2002 be included in his official transcripts and on his Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRF), specifically his in-the-zone and one above-the-zone PRFs. The complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01266
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-01266 02-02454 INDEX CODE: 100.05, 131.01 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) effective 20 June 1999 be changed from “16F4A” to “P16F4AW” on his officer selection brief (OSB); his duty title effective 1 April 1995 be changed...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02454
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-01266 02-02454 INDEX CODE: 100.05, 131.01 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) effective 20 June 1999 be changed from “16F4A” to “P16F4AW” on his officer selection brief (OSB); his duty title effective 1 April 1995 be changed...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00071
AFPC/DPPPO notes the applicant provides a letter from personnel at IDE stating a copy of the TR was faxed on 1 Jul 05. The applicant states that what DPPPO does not indicate is that most of the TRs that closed out the same date as his were in the members’ Officer Selection Record (OSR) for his promotion board. Based on the letter from the Associate Dean of the school the applicant attended at AFIT, steps were taken to expedite the Training Reports (TR) of all the graduates of the AFIT IDE...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01444
In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of an Air Form 102, Inspector General Personal and Fraud, Waste & Abuse Complaint Registration; a background paper detailing the alleged inconsistencies; a statement signed by all but one of his classmates alleging the inconsistencies; and an additional statement from one classmate that later became part of the USAFWS staff, stating that the following class changed their assessment criteria due to the inconsistent standards that were...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03682
Each time the report was corrected the current date was used to re-sign the report rather than the date the report was originally signed. The rater states the original report was signed prior to the selection board; he was forced to re-accomplish the report, not only once but twice, preventing the report to be viewed as part of the promotion record. The DPPPEP complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR...