RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02077
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. He be considered for a Regular commission.
2. His be considered for retroactive promotion to the grade
of lieutenant colonel.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Officer Evaluation Report (OER) included in his records at
the time of consideration for a regular commission by the 7-year
Board was biased and detrimental. The report was subsequently
removed; however, he believes it was the reason for his
nonselection for a regular commission.
If he had been selected for a regular commission, he would have
been continued in service and eligible for promotion to the grade
of lieutenant colonel. At the time of his separation, he had
14 years, 5 months of active commissioned service. As a Reserve
officer, he could have served 20 years. He believes he would
have been promoted to lieutenant colonel if he had remained on
active duty.
In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of his DD
Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, his retirement
orders and voided OER.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was not selected for Regular Air Force (RegAF) by
the Fiscal Year 66 (FY66), FY68 and FY70 Regular Air Force
Selection Boards. At that time, RegAF boards were held at the 2,
4 and 7 year point.
According to an AF Form 77a, Supplemental Sheet to AF Forms 77,
on 17 June 1970, the applicant was not rated for the period 6 Aug
66 thru 27 Mar 67 as the report for this period was removed
through appeals board action.
The FY70 board would have been his 7-year board. The selection
rate to RegAF for this board was seven percent for nonrated
officers.
Based on his date of rank to major of 1 Jun 73, he would have
been eligible to meet the Calendar Year 78 (CY78) Lieutenant
Colonel Board which convened on 21 Aug 78.
On 1 Mar 77, the applicant retired from the Air Force Reserves in
the grade of major.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial. DPSOO states the applicant has
not provided evidence that the OER in question was the sole
reason for his nonselection to RegAF. In addition, he has not
provided evidence that he would have been selected for lieutenant
colonel had he been eligible to meet the board.
DPSOO opines a direct promotion would be unfair to other officers
who were not selected for Regular Air Force and required to
retire at the 20 year point without being able to meet a
lieutenant colonel promotion board.
DPSOO notes both Congress and DoD have made clear their intent
that errors ultimately affecting promotion should be resolved
through the use of Special Selection Boards (SSBs). DPSOO states
there are no grounds to grant an SSB for any board the applicant
was not eligible to meet.
DPSOO states the case should be dismissed as untimely. The
applicant was on active duty for seven years after the report was
removed and took no action during that time. DPSOO notes that
stale claims cannot be adequately addressed because the passage
of time could result in the loss or destruction of the
records/documentation needed to adjudicate the claim. Therefore,
it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the time
limit and decide the case on its merits.
The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 16 Sep 11, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The application was not filed within three years after the
alleged error or injustice was discovered, or reasonably could
have been discovered, as required by Section 1552, Title 10,
United States Code (10 USC 1552), and Air Force Instruction 36-
2603. Thus the application is untimely.
2. Paragraph b of 10 USC 1552 permits us, in our discretion, to
excuse untimely filing in the interest of justice. We have
carefully reviewed applicant's submission and the entire record,
and we do not find a sufficient basis to excuse the untimely
filing of this application. The applicant has not shown a
plausible reason for delay in filing, and we are not persuaded
that the record raises issues of error or injustice which require
resolution on the merits at this time. Accordingly, we conclude
that it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the
untimely filing of the application.
_______________________________________________________________
DECISION OF THE BOARD:
The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the
decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as
untimely.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 8 Mar 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-02077:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 May 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOO, dated 2 Sep 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Sep 11.
Panel Chair
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 01-01765 INDEX CODE 131.10 102.03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Not Indicated _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be afforded a special records review regarding his promotability to the grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC) on the Aug 67 promotion cycle and he be promoted retroactively to LTC, or at least to LTC in the Retired...
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Selection Board Secretariat, AFMPC/DPMAE3, reviewed the application regarding Defective Selection Boards and recommends denial. However, other portions of DODD 1320.09 stated: tlSelection boards convened for different competitive categories or grades may be convened concurrently,Il and When more than one selection board is convened to recommend officers in different competitive categories or grades...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 88-02168A
A complete copy of the DPMAJA evaluation is at Exhibit L. The Officer Appointment/Selective Continuation Section, AFMPC/DPPPOC, reviewed the submissions and recommended denial of the applicant's request that a statement be placed in his OSR reflecting he was not eligible for the CY86 Regular Air Force (RegAF) Appointment Board. A complete copy of the DPPPOC evaluation is at Exhibit M. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
The Air Force elected to retain the controlled system of reports in officer selection folders. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Selection Board Secretariat, AFMPC/DPMAB, reviewed the application regarding Defective Selection Boards and recommends denial. The provisions of law and directive were violated by the Air Force selection board procedures used when applicant was considered for promotion.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03220A
Additional AFBCMR applications resulted in the applicant’s record being corrected, on 25 Feb 04, to show he was tendered a Regular appointment effective 8 Feb 81, and that he served in the grade of major until his retirement in that grade on 1 Jul 93. The ROP contained factual errors and did not even come close to summarizing his remarks and the new evidence he provided. The record contains a letter dated January 15, 2003, to applicant from AFPC/DPOC informing him that as a result of his...
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Selection Board Secretariat, AFMPC/DPMAB, reviewed the application regarding Defective Selection Boards and recommends denial. The provisions of law and directive were violated by the Air Force selection board procedures used when applicant was considered for promotion. Counsel's complete response is attached at Exhibit I.
Continuation on active duty for a period of time in order to be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by two selection boards. He was also considered and not selected by the CY79 and CY80 Permanent Major Selection Boards. As a result of an earlier appeal to the AFBCMR, he was considered and not selected by Special Selection Board (SSB) , which convened on 8 November 1982, by each of the above boards.
The operation of the Air Force selection boards did not comply with Sections 616 and 617, Based on these illegal actions, he requests that his promotion nonselections be Set aside and correction of his record to reflect continuous active duty until the first day of the month following the decision on this petition. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Selection Board Secretariat, AFMPC/DPMAB, reviewed the application regarding Defective Selection Boards and...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00078
Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. The DPSOO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicants spouse reiterates her original contentions; however, she wants her husbands Officer Evaluation Report (OER) examined to see why he would be promoted to major below-the-zone and then...
The AFBCMR has considered these previous cases: In an application dated 18 January 1965, the applicant, a captain, made the following request: The AF Form 77, USAF Officer Effectiveness Report (OER), for the period 1 August 1963 - 31 May 1964 be removed from his records. In an application dated 13 May 1972, the applicant, a major, made the following requests: a. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be...