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: 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.