RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04455 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. Her Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 
13 Sep 10 to 12 Sep 11 be included in her Officer Selection 
Record (OSR). 

 

2. Her core flag identifier on her Officer Selection Brief (OSB) 
for the L0311F Reduction in Force (RIF) Board be corrected and 
she be given supplemental consideration by the same Board 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Her OPR which closed out on 12 Sep 11 was not completed until 
16 Oct 11 and, as a result, it was not considered by the RIF 
Board that met on 19 Sep 11. The OPR included stratifications 
from the rater and additional rater that boosted her record and 
would have made a difference to the board. If the contested OPR 
had been included in her record, the Board would have known she 
was already cross-training into another career field based on a 
bullet reflected on the OPR. 

 

In support of the request, the applicant provides an expanded 
statement and copies of her AF Forms 707, Officer Performance 
Report, Officer Selection Brief (OSB), electronic mail 
correspondence, a news article, and other documents related to 
the matter under review. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served in the Regular Air Force in the grade of 
captain (O-3) during the matter under review. 

 


The applicant’s OPR profile as a captain follows: 

 

 PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 

 

 12 Sep 08 Meets Standards (MS) 

 12 Sep 09 MS 

 12 Sep 10 MS 

 30 Jun 11 Training Report (TR) 

 *12 Sep 11 MS 

 

*Contested Report 

 

On 1 Mar 12, the applicant was released from active duty due to a 
reduction in force and was credited with seven years, nine 
months, and six days of total active service. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C, D and E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSAB states that the applicant’s core flag was updated on 
25 Jul 11, 14 days after she was accepted into the 38F career 
field. 

 

The complete APFC/DPSAB evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSIDEP defers to AFPC/DPSOO for SSB recommendation or 
consideration. DPSIDEP notes the applicant did not file an 
appeal through the Evaluations Report Appeals Board (ERAB). 
Since the contested OPR is already on file in both the 
applicant's OSR and the Automated Records Management System 
(ARMS), no action is required by DPSIDEP. Although, the 
applicant’s OPR closed out on 12 Sep 11, it was not required to 
be in her record until 60 days after the close-out date, or 
11 Nov 11. The Board convened on 19 Sep 11 and the applicant’s 
evaluator's did not sign and finalize the report until 20 Oct 11, 
after the convening of the board. There are other officers 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 
applicant’s OPR to be included after the convening of the board 
would allow her an advantage other officers are not afforded. 

 

In addition, if the AFBCMR determines changes should be made to 
the applicant’s OPR to make it eligible for a SSB, i.e., backdating signature dates, the only course of action would be to 
have the entire report reaccomplished in "wet signature” as the 
contested report was digitally signed. Currently, each signature 
on the electronic (digitally signed) 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 AFPC/DPSIDEP evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial of the applicant's request to 
include the contested OPR in her L0311F OSR and grant her SSB 
consideration. The absence of this report is not an error 
because it was not required to be filed in her OSR until 
11 Nov 11. Officers being considered by RIF boards have 
different closeout dates for their performance reports. Since 
many eligible officers fall into this dilemma, approving SSB 
consideration with a report not required to be on file would 
generate unfairness in the current process. 

 

Eligible officers meeting a RIF Board have the option to submit a 
letter to the board president addressing any matter of record 
that they believe is important to their consideration for 
promotion. As such, the applicant could have written a letter to 
the board members informing them of the accomplishments mentioned 
in the report. The applicant did not take these steps. The time 
to submit a letter is prior to convening of the original board, 
not after nonselection. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 Apr 12, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit F). As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing 
law or regulations. 

 

2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our 


conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or 
injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the 
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an 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-2011-04455 in Executive Session on 16 Aug 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Nov 11, w/atchs and 

 Applicant’s letter, dated 13 Jan 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPASB, dated 23 Jan 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 20 Mar 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 28 Mar 12 

 Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Apr 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair