RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02042
		INDEX CODE:  131.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Officer Selection Briefs (OSBs) prepared for consideration by the Calendar Years 1999B (CY99B) and 2000A (CY00A) Lieutenant Colonel Boards be amended to reflect one duty title versus five duty titles from 24 Jan 85 to 25 May 88.

He be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration with his corrected records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

From 24 Jan 85 until 25 May 88, he had a single assignment as a B1-B Avionics Systems Analyst.  His duty history indicated a five-time change of assignments over the same period, which was incorrect.  He believes the error played a role in his nonselection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel.  The frequency of the job changes gave the appearance that he was not performing his duties adequately to retain the assigned position.  However, this was not the case (Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major, having been promoted to that grade on 1 May 96.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 21 Jul 82.

Applicant's Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile follows:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION

	 9 Nov 84			Training Report
	23 May 85			1-1-1
	23 Nov 85			1-1-1
	23 May 86			1-1-1
	23 Nov 86			1-1-1
	23 May 87			1-1-1
	18 Oct 87			1-1-1
	18 Dec 87			Training Report
	 1 Jun 88			1-1-0
	 6 Jun 89			Training Report
	14 Dec 89			Training Report
	 1 Jul 90			Meets Standards
	 1 Jul 91			Meets Standards
	 1 Jul 92			Meets Standards
	 7 Dec 92			Meets Standards
	30 Jul 93			Meets Standards
	31 May 94			Meets Standards
	27 Sep 95			Training Report
	27 Sep 96			Training Report
	 1 Dec 97			Training Report
	 6 Aug 98			Meets Standards
 #    6 Aug 99			Meets Standards
##    6 Aug 00			Meets Standards

 # Top Report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY99B (30 Nov 99) Lt Col Board.

## Top Report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY00A (28 Nov 00) Lt Col Board.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial.  DPPPO noted the applicant’s contention that his OSBs should have shown only one duty title for the three-year period from 24 Jan 85 until 25 May 88.  According to DPPPO, AFPC/DPASA reviewed the applicant’s contentions and supported correcting his duty history to match the OPRs for that period.  Although the applicant contended that his duty history entries were incorrect on his OSBs, the selection boards had his entire officer selection record, including his OPRs for the contested period.  According to DPASA’s attached memorandum, the OPRs contained the correct duty titles.  Accordingly, DPPPO indicated that they are not convinced the additional duty titles caused his promotion nonselection.

A complete copy of the DPPPO evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 12 Oct 01 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  The applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted.  However, we do not find the applicant’s assertions and the documentation submitted in support of his appeal sufficiently persuasive that corrective action is warranted.  The applicant contends that from 24 Jan 85 until 25 May 88, his duty history should reflect one duty title, rather than five duty titles.  No clear-cut evidence has been presented which shows that his duty history was in error.  AFPC/DPASA indicated that they would support correcting his duty history to match his OPRs for that period.  We did note that, based on his OPRs, there were three entries that appeared to be duplicates.  But, in our view, those entries would be considered harmless errors.  In this respect, we note that the applicant was promoted to the grade of major with those entries in his records.  Furthermore, we opine that the applicant had a responsibility to ensure that his record was correct prior to being considered for promotion.  However, we do not believe he has exercised due diligence in doing so.  His duty history has contained the contested duty titles since 1985.  We find no evidence that he ever took action to correct his duty history after his first nonselection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY99B (30 Nov 99) Lt Col Board.  Thus, his duty history contained those same entries when he was considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY00A (28 Nov 00) Lt Col Board.  In view of the above, and in the absence of sufficient evidence to support a determination that the applicant’s record before the original selection board was so inaccurate or misleading that the board was unable to make a reasonable decision concerning his promotability in relationship to his peers, we find no compelling 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 probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 28 Nov 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 2 Oct 01, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 12 Oct 01.