RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00343 INDEX CODE: 111.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 25 June 2006 through 24 June 2007 be corrected to reflect the rank of major rather than lieutenant colonel. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His promotion to lieutenant colonel was via a Special Selection Board (SSB). The United States Senate did not confirm the SSB results until 1 August 2007 - over one month after the reporting period of the contested OPR. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of the contested OPR and a senate confirmation notification memorandum. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of lieutenant colonel having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 April 2003. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial. DPSIDEP states although the Senate confirmed the promotion on 1 August 2007, the actual effective date of rank (DOR) was 1 April 2003. Therefore, the 24 June 2007 OPR is correct in reflecting the rank of lieutenant colonel. Due to the applicant’s DOR being changed to 1 April 2003, the OPRs that closed out on 14 July 2003, 24 June 2004, 24 June 2005 and 24 June 2006 should also reflect the rank of lieutenant colonel. However, it would be in the interest of the applicant to allow these reports to remain reflecting the rank of major. The DPSIDEP complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial. DPSOO concurs with the DPSIDEP recommendation to keep the grade on the report as lieutenant colonel. Although the Senate confirmed the list after the close out of the report, his DOR is retroactive to 2003 thereby making all of his reports since April 2003 incorrect. At the time the report was being finalized, the results of the SSB were known by the applicant’s commander. DPSOO does not concur with changing any of the reports without the applicant applying for the correction as he may want to have the reports changed to correct the corresponding Developmental Education (DE) pushes and job recommendations. The DPSOO complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 25 June 2010, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has received no 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 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 their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that 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. 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 issues 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 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-2010-00343 in Executive Session on 9 September 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-00343 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 January 2010, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 10 May 2010. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 27 May 2010. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 June 2010.