RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
 
 
_____________________  

 

 

 
 
 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02702 
COUNSEL: NO 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 
IN THE MATTER OF:    
 
 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
All  information  relating  to  his  involuntary  retirement  be 
removed  from  his  P0610C  Officer  Selection  Brief  (OSB)  and  his 
corrected  record  be  given  Special  Selection  Board  (SSB) 
consideration  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  colonel  by  the 
Calendar  Year  2010C  Colonel  Line  of  the  Air  Force  Central 
Selection Board (CY10C Col LAF CSB).   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
The data reflected on his OSB was prejudicial to his record and 
its  inclusion  was  unjust  for  it  was  due  to  action  of  the 
Calendar  Year  2010A  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selective  Early 
Retirement Board (CY10 Lt Col SERB). 
 
His  selection  record  could  never  receive  a  fair  and  equitable 
assessment by the board members for it was tainted by the word 
“Retirement”  and  indicated  a  date  of  separation  (DOS)  a  few 
months  following  the  board.    It  was  an  injustice  for  his 
selection  record  to  indicate  he  was  retiring  since  his 
retirement was not voluntary.  He was not afforded the chance to 
be  honestly  evaluated  amongst  his  peers  during  his  last 
promotion  board  as  the  inclusion  of  his  pending  retirement  was 
damaging  and  prejudicial  to  his  record.    Any  board  member  who 
noted this information could not help but view his record in a 
negative  manner.    Since  his  retirement  was  not  of  his  own 
choosing, it was clearly unfair to place this information before 
a promotion board.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  is  a  former  member  of  the  Regular  Air  Force  who 
retired effective 1 June 2011 in the grade of lieutenant colonel 
(O-5).   
 

 
 

The applicant met and was non-selected for promotion to colonel 
(O-6) by the CY09A, CY09D and CY10C Col LAF CSBs.  He also met 
the CY10A Lt Col SERB and was not selected for retention.  
 
The  remaining  relevant  facts,  extracted  from  the  applicant 
military service record, are contained in the evaluations by the 
Air Force offices of primary responsibility at Exhibits C and D.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSOO  recommends  denial.    DPSOO  states  that  board  members 
take  an  oath  to  act  in  the  best  interest  of  the  Air  Force  and 
are  charged  with  using  the  whole-person  concept  in  assessing 
each  officer’s  record.    A  DOS  is  just  one  of  the  many  factors 
that  are  part  of  the  whole-person  concept.    Although  the  OSB 
reflects a reason for the DOS, board members do not know whether 
it  is  voluntary  or  involuntary.    As  with  every  board,  when 
officers with an approved retirement or separation are selected 
for  promotion,  it  gives  them  the  opportunity  to  pull  their 
retirement or separation paperwork and remain on active duty to 
accept the promotion.  The applicant wrote a letter to the board 
advising  them  that  he  was  selected  for  retirement  by  the  SERB.  
In  addition,  a  review  of  the  board  file  shows  that  there  were 
269 officers with an approved retirement between 1 Mach 2011 and 
1 January 2012 who had retirement as a reason for their DOS on 
their OSB.   
 
The  applicant  met  the  CY10C  Col  CSB  as  an  Above-the-Promotion-
Zone  (APZ)  eligible  with  a  “Promote”  recommendation.    A  review 
of  the  promotion  statistics  shows  the  selection  rate  for  APZ 
officers with a “Promote” recommendation was .6 percent (5/898).  
It is doubtful the DOS or reason for DOS in the OSB was the lone 
factor for the applicant’s non-selection.   
 
DPSOO indicates the applicant has not provided any evidence that 
his  selection  record  did  not  receive  a  fair  and  equitable 
assessment by board members.  In addition, granting relief would 
be unfair to the hundreds of other officers who had voluntary or 
involuntary retirements on their selection briefs.   
 
The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C.   
 
AFPC/PB  recommends  denial.    PB  states  the  promotion  board 
complied with all governing directives and Secretary of the Air 
Force guidance.  There is absolutely no evidence to support the 
applicant’s claim.   
 
The complete PB evaluation is at Exhibit D.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 

2 

 
 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
His argument has two simple points: 1) an involuntary DOS and the 
word “Retirement” are prejudicial information in an OSB, and 2) it 
was unjust to include this information on his OSB.  Prior to the 
CY10A Lt Col SERB, he had an unblemished record, but the Air Force 
felt that it had too many Lt Cols and elected to force him into 
early  retirement.    This  involuntary  administrative  action  should 
not have a negative effect on his official record, but he feels 
that it did, specifically in the case of his OSB for the CY10C Col 
LAF CSB.   
 
The applicant’s complete rebuttal is at Exhibit F.   
 
__________________________________________________________________ 
 
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.  We have 
reviewed  the  available  evidence  pertaining  to  the  applicant’s 
assertions  regarding  his  OSB  and  we  are  not  persuaded  that 
corrective action is warranted.  While the applicant argues that 
his  DOS  on  the  OSB  tainted  the  Board’s  view  in  a  negative 
manner, we find no evidence of this or that he has been treated 
differently  than  similarly  situated  officers.    Therefore,  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  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  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. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 

3 

The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number  BC-2012-02702  in  Executive  Session  on  14  March  2013, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
 
 

___________________, Vice Chair 
___________________, Member 
___________________, Member 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-02702 was considered: 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Jun 12, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 30 Aug 12. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/PB, dated 2 Oct 12. 
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Nov 12. 
Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Dec 12. 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

__________________ 
Vice Chair 

4