RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04015 

 COUNSEL: NO 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be considered for promotion to the grade of 
lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the 
Calendar Year 2010A (CY10A) Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Central 
Selection Board (CSB) with inclusion of his Officer Performance 
Report (OPR), rendered for the period 12 April 2009 through 
15 January 2010, in his Officer Selection Record (OSR). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Due to a system malfunction with the 22nd Operations Group’s 
electronic performance report tracking system, numerous OPRs 
were deleted, to include his OPR closing 15 January 2010. The 
exclusion of this OPR in his OSR resulted in an incomplete 
evaluation of his potential for promotion. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a statement 
from his commander (Additional Rater) and a copy of the OPR 
closing 15 January 2010. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in 
the grade of major (O-4) with a date of rank of 1 May 2006. His 
Total Active Federal Military Service Date and Total Active 
Federal Commissioned Service Date is 29 May 2006. He has two 
non-selections to the grade of Lt Col by the CY10A and CY11A Lt 
Col CSBs. 

 

The following is a resume of the applicant’s performance 
reports: 

 

 PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 

 

12 Apr 97 (2Lt) Meets Standards (MS) 

13 Feb 98 Training Report (TR) 

23 Oct 98 (1Lt) TR 


 PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 

 

 3 Mar 99 TR 

23 Oct 99 MS 

23 Oct 00 (Capt) MS 

23 Oct 01 MS 

20 Dec 01 TR 

28 Jun 02 TR 

23 Oct 02 MS 

23 Oct 03 MS 

23 Oct 04 MS 

23 Oct 05 MS 

23 Apr 06 MS 

15 Apr 07 (Maj) MS 

11 Apr 08 MS 

12 Apr 09 MS 

15 Jan 10 MS 

 

The remaining relevant facts extracted from the applicant 
service records are contained in the evaluations by the Air 
Force offices of primary responsibility at Exhibit B and C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSID defers to DPSOO. DPSID indicates the applicant’s 
report closing 15 January 2010 is already in the applicant’s OSR 
and has been placed in the Automated Records Management System 
(ARMS). Therefore, no action is required by their office at 
this time. 

 

DPSID states although the OPR in question closed-out on 
15 January 2010, in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-
2406, Table 3.6, Note 1a, the report was not required to be in 
the applicant’s record until 60 days after the close-out date, 
or 16 March 2010. The CY10A Lt Col CSB convened on 8 March 2010 
and the evaluators had not signed and finalized the report until 
3 August 2010, after the board had convened. There are other 
officer’s in similar circumstances where the close-out date is 
similar; however, unless the OPR is processed with all 
signatures, the OPR cannot be placed into the member’s record. 
To allow the OPR to be included after the board convened would 
allow the applicant to have an advantage other officers are not 
afforded. If any OPRs are processed within 60 days of the 
promotion board, they will be processed and, if possible, placed 
in the record for consideration at the promotion board. 

 

DPSID indicates that if the Board should determine that any 
changes must be made to the OPR to make it eligible for an SSB 
(for instance backdating signature dates), the only recourse of 
action on the electronic (digitally signed) version of the OPR 
is to have the entire report reaccomplished in “wet signature” 
(printed and physically signed). Currently, each signature on 


the electronic form is tied to a certificate of authenticity; 
and when these forms are digitally signed, the date auto-
populates and cannot be changed. Any attempts to make changes 
to a digitally signed form will potentially revoke the 
certificate of authenticity and render the document null and 
void. 

 

The complete DSID evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial. DPSOO states that the applicant’s 
OPR closing 15 January 2010 was not required to be in his OSR 
until 15 March 2010, which was after the 8 March 2010 board 
convening date. Furthermore, the dates on the report are also 
all after the convening of the board. This report not only 
closed after the start of the CSB, but the signature dates are 
also after the CSB. Therefore, the report could not be filed in 
his record regardless if it was or not processed in a timely 
manner. Allowing the inclusion of reports that were not 
required to be in the OSR to be the basis for SSB consideration 
would be unfair to other officers with similar circumstances. 

 

DPSOO indicates that eligible officers meeting an SSB have the 
option to submit a letter to the board president addressing any 
matter of record concerning themselves that they believe is 
important to their consideration for promotion. As such, the 
applicant could have written a letter to board members informing 
them of the accomplishments mentioned in his 15 January 2010 
report. They have verified that he did not take these steps. 
The time to submit a letter is prior to convening of the 
original board, not after non-selection. 

 

DPSOO states that should the Board approve the relief sought, 
then they concur with DPSID’s recommendation to have the report 
reaccomplished in “wet signature.” 

 

The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

ADDITIONAL RATER’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: 

 

The applicant’s commander (Additional Rater) provides a 
statement in response to the Air Force advisory opinions 
indicating the applicant’s OPR closing 15 January 2010 was not 
included for the CY10A Lt Col CSB due to a significant 
malfunction with their Wing’s electronic performance report 
tracking system. Numerous OPRs, including the applicant’s, were 
deleted and had to be reaccomplished due to this failure. 
However, no others had the catastrophic consequences that the 
loss of the applicant’s did. His intent and primary objective 
was to ensure this OPR was included in the applicant’s record 
for the CY10A Lt Col CSB. He painstakingly accomplished this 
OPR to accurately showcase the applicant’s continued exemplary 
performance. However, in this case, technology out of his or 


the applicant’s control failed and this OPR was not processed in 
time to be considered at the promotion board. He and the 
applicant both believed the OPR had been completed, processed, 
and met the board. Based on the system failure and belief at 
the time, that the OPR had been completed and met the board, the 
applicant never had logical reason to write a letter to the 
board president. Given his intent and the reason behind the OPR 
not making it into the applicant’s record, the right thing to do 
now is to give the applicant a complete and fair evaluation 
through an SSB that considers his full record, including the OPR 
which closed-out on 15 January 2010. To pass on this 
opportunity to reevaluate the applicant’s complete record for 
promotion is an injustice to him, and may cost the Air Force a 
fantastic Lt Col. 

 

The additional rater’s complete response is at Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 an injustice. After 
reviewing the complete evidence of record and noting the 
applicant’s assertions, we find it insufficient to justify 
granting the relief requested. In that regard, we note that an 
error has not occurred since the OPR in question was not 
required to be a matter of record prior to the convening of the 
CY10A Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB). 
Consequently, we considered whether the failure to make the OPR 
a matter of record for consideration by the CY10A Lieutenant 
Colonel CSB constitutes an injustice. In our view, it does not. 
While the applicant provides a statement of support from his 
group commander who was the additional rater on the OPR, we note 
that this Board has generally only approved these types of 
request under the most extraordinary of circumstances. In our 
view the evidence provided does not support granting an 
exception to how cases of this type are normally adjudicated. 
In that regard, we note that officer performance reports have 
varied closeout dates and that many applicants to the Board have 
felt it to be an injustice when they are considered for 
promotion without their most recent report. However, we believe 
it would be fundamentally unfair to allow consideration for 
promotion by a special selection board with inclusion of a 
report that was filed in accordance with prevailing policy 
without justification that supports making an exception to 
policy. Therefore, based on the foregoing and in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 issues 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-04015 in Executive Session on 19 July 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-04015 was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Oct 10, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 13 Jan 11. 

Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 24 Jan 11. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Feb 11. 

Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Feb 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair