RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04368
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS:
Her Officer Performance Report (OPR) for the period of
10 May 2010 through 9 May 2011 be included as part of the As
Met record for consideration for promotion to the grade of
Colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the calendar year
(CY) 2011 Colonel, Central Selection Board (CSB).
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her OPR was submitted to the executive staff for routing on
4 May 2011. Information reflected on her Promotion
Recommendation Form (PRF) referenced the 9 May 2011 OPR. The
board convened on 6 June 2011. The evaluators signed and
finalized the report on 11 June 2011. Since the OPR was not
submitted to AFPC until after the board convened,
unsubstantiated material appeared on her PRF. Her OPR was not
intentionally withheld from the board.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a copy of an
email and a statement from her former additional rater.
The applicants 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 Lieutenant Colonel with Effective Date and Date of
Rank of 1 May 2005.
The applicant has one non-selection to the grade of Colonel by
the CY 2011 Colonel CSB.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. DPSID states although the OPR
closed out on 9 May 2011, in accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation System, Table 3.6, Note 1a, the
report was not required to be in the applicants record until
60 days after the close-out date, 9 July 2011. There are other
officers in comparable circumstances where the close-out date is
similar; however, unless the OPR is processed with all
signatures, it cannot be placed into the members record. To
allow the OPR to be included after the board convenes would
allow the applicant an advantage not afforded other officers.
The complete AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial. Their recommendation to deny SSB
consideration is based on DPSIDs memorandum stating the absence
of the report was not an error because it was not required to be
filed in the applicants Officer Selection Record (OSR) until
9 July 2011, after the board convened.
The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 1 March 2012 for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit E). To date, this office has not received a 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 error or injustice to warrant
approval of the applicants requests. 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 basis for our conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice regarding the
inclusion of her OPR closing 9 May 2011 in her OSR.
Additionally, we note the applicants contention that because
the OPR was not a matter of record for the CY11A Colonel CSB, it
caused unsubstantiated material to be reflected on her PRF;
however, we note that applicable Air Force policy does not
restrict a senior rater to only commenting on issues documented
in performance reports. Therefore, 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 issue(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2011-04368 in Executive Session on 19 June 2012, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 November 2011, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 23 January 2012.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 1 February 2012.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 March 2012.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05186
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05186 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (OPR) (Lt thru Col), rendered for the period 16 September 2012 through 26 June 2013, be filed in her Officer Selection Record (OSR). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her final OPR from the Joint Staff, corrected DMSM, or the correct version of her PRF were not timely submitted to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01799
Although, the applicants OPR closed out on 3 Nov 12, it was not required to be in her record until 60 days after the close-out date, or 3 Jan 13. The Board convened on 5 Nov 12 and the applicants evaluator's did not sign and finalize the report until 15 Nov 12, with the applicant acknowledging receipt on 21 Nov 12, after the convening of the board. The absence of this report is not an error because it was not required to be filed in her OSR until 3 Jan 13.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01473
Additionally, the applicant filed another request to the ERAB on 19 October 2010 requesting the CY2009C PRF be removed and he be provided SSB consideration. The new PRF resurrects the same performance comments from the voided OPR and resulted in the same effect as if the original OPR and PRF were never removed. The senior rater used the PRF to make an end-run around the OPR process after the ERAB decision to void the evaluators original referral OPR and PRF.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02317
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her promotion record was not complete at the time of the CY11A Lt Col CSB which prevented the promotion board from making a proper determination on her qualifications/competitiveness for promotion. Her Officer Performance Report (OPR) closing 1 May 2011 was not filed in her Officer Selection Record (OSR) for the original CY11A Lt Col CSB. The non-selection received by the CY11A Lt Col CSB SSB was...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04446
The board convened on 8 March 2010 and the report was not finalized until 10 April 2010, after the board adjourned. DPSOO states the absence of the 11 February 2010 OPR does not constitute an error since the report was not required to be filed in the applicants record until 60 days after the close out date, or 13 April 2010. The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03165
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) and the United States Central Command Air Forces (USCENTAF) failed to update his duty history to reflect his command in Baghdad from 19 Apr to 30 Jun 03, even though he held the position for more than sixty days. A review of the OPRs included in the applicants record for the CY06A Board, reflect overall ratings of meets standards. The applicant has six...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00740
The complete DPALL evaluations, dated 15 May 2013 and 27 March 2013, are at Exhibits C and D. AFPC/DPSID defers to the Air Force Decoration Board on whether the applicants actions merit award of the MSM, 2 OLC. f. Providing his corrected record, to include the PRF reflecting an overall promotion recommendation of DP, promotion consideration by an SSB for the CY10A Lt Col CSB. d. He be awarded the MSM, 2 OLC, for meritorious service during the period from 25 November 2008 to 30 November...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01396
1 The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits B thru C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request to substitute his contested PRF with the revised PRF. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial of the applicant’s request for...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03469
The applicant fails to recognize that the PRF is not the only record which documents performance within the Officer Selection Record (OSR) at the time of CSB promotion consideration. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOO recommends denying the applicants request for direct promotion to the grade of Lt Col; however, they support Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration in order for the applicant to write a letter to the CY2011A Lt Col CSB highlighting...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00293
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request to correct his DAFSC on his P0510A PRF. He requests his record be corrected with the Section Commander duty title and a C prefix added to his DAFSC, followed by SSB consideration. Therefore, we are convinced that both...