RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00078 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her husband be promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel (0-5). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She is not sure why her husband did not get promoted to 
lieutenant colonel and would like his records looked at to see if 
there could have been an error regarding his promotion. He was 
awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) and the Bronze 
Star Medal BSM. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of a 
physician’s letter and a personal statement. 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant served in the Regular Air Force and was 
progressively promoted to the grade of major (0-4), having 
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 21 Dec 
65. He retired on 30 Sep 74 after serving 20 years, 3 months, 
and 23 days on active duty. 

 

Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the 
Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts 
in this Record of Proceedings. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial. DPSOO states the application is 
untimely and should be dismissed as untimely. Furthermore, after 
a review of his records, it shows that he was fairly considered 
for promotion to lieutenant colonel. DPSOO notes that there is 


no evidence to show that there were any errors made by the 
promotion board when her husband was not selected for promotion 
to lieutenant colonel. 

 

The DPSOO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant’s spouse reiterates her original contentions; 
however, she wants her husband’s Officer Evaluation Report (OER) 
examined to see why he would be promoted to major below-the-zone 
and then passed over on his first time eligible for lieutenant 
colonel. He completed the required professional military 
education, and as stated earlier, was awarded the BSM. She also 
requests she be provided a copy of his OER so she can try and 
determine for herself why he was not promoted. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission 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 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 error or injustice. 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 office of primary responsibility 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the 
service member has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
We note the applicant’s request to have her husband’s OER 
reviewed to find out why he was not promoted to lieutenant 
colonel and also to be provided a copy of the OER. However, we 
must point out that the burden of showing that a member is the 
victim of an error or injustice rests with the applicant. As 
such, the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to show 
that the service member was the victim of 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. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-00078 in Executive Session on 9 Aug 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Nov 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 13 Jun 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Jul 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Jul 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair