RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02195
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Corrections be made to documents contained in his Officer Selection Record (OSR) and on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB); and, he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1999 (P0599A) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Erroneous entries on his OSB and the quality of the documents contained in his OSR portrayed a non-competitive picture to the board members.  Specifically, his last three duty titles portray a sequence of non-increasing responsibility although his position had not changed during that period.  His Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) associated with his 6 Oct 92 duty title should contain an "A" prefix, vice "V".  The Military Personnel Flight (MPF) has since corrected the above errors.  The overall recommendation block on his Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) is smudged.  The Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) indicated that "... replacing it does make the PRF stronger."  His Officer Performance Report (OPR) which closed-out on 12 Mar 98, was signed on 30 Jul 98 and 10 Aug 98, respectively, by the additional rater and reviewer, this delay may have portrayed to board members that his final endorsements were being held in connection to actions on his behalf.  The narrative on his Joint Service Achievement Medal (JSAM) First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC), his Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), and AFCM (1OLC) contained errors and subsequent pen and ink changes which presented an unprofessional appearance and produced a negative impression.  

In support of his request the applicant provided a personal statement, a copy of his P0599A and P0599B PRFs, documents associated with his ERAB application, his OSR, documents associated with his duty history changes; and, corrected copies of his JSAM, AFCM, and AFCM 1OLC.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data reflected in the personnel data system reflects that applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force on 21 Jan 83 and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on that same date.  He was integrated into the Regular Air Force on 25 Nov 86 and has been progressively promoted to the grade of major, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 6 Feb 95.  Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY99A (19 Apr 99), CY99B (30 Nov 99), and the CY00A (28 Nov 00), lieutenant colonel selection boards.  He currently has a projected date of separation of 31 Jan 07.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO states that his contention that his three duty titles portray a sequence of non-increasing levels of responsibility would be true if the period were over 3 years.  These separate entries were generated by the reorganization/realignment of his unit and cover a time span of 4 months.  The change, that has already been taken by the MPF per his request, does not alter his records or duty history.  With regards to his duty titles associated with 12 Nov 87 and 5 Jul 88, the entries are not identical.  In the early 90's the Military Airlift Command (MAC) lost all weather assets and the Air Weather Service was created.  Therefore, the separate entries are correct.

According to AFVA 36-1, dated 31 Oct 89, the "A" prefix was used to indicate a commander position until the AF reorganized the entire AFSC coding system.  Effective 31 Oct 93, a commander position was indicated by a "C" prefix.  For his 9 Oct 92 duty entry, "A" is correct and there should be a subsequent entry effective 31 Oct 93 to reflect a change from "A" to "C" (see Exhibit C)

AFPC/DPPP recommends denial of the applicant's request.  DPPP states that on the ERAB decision letter there was a mistake.  It read in part, "Although the "X" in Section IX is smudged, replacing it does make the PRF stronger."  It should have read "... does not make the PRF stronger."  The ERAB letter clearly shows the intent of the letter is to convey the non-critical nature of stray marks on evaluation reports (see Exhibit D).

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial of the applicant's request and that his duty history correction requests be time-barred.  Incorrect duty history entries from 9, 13, and 14 years ago are considered minor administrative changes and do not warrant promotion reconsideration.  

With respect to his contention that the signatures on his OPR may have portrayed that his final endorsements were being held in connection to action on his behalf, DPPPO states that given that each evaluator was assigned to a different base, there is no evidence that indicates the OPR was delayed for any other reason.  According to AFPC/DPSAM the markings on the decoration citations are the document identifiers that are input into the Automated Records Management System (ARMS) database to provide index information for every document in the system.  The purpose of highlighted, underlined, or circled data is to assist the person indexing the document in finding the required indexing data without having to read through the whole document.  Most documents processed into ARMS on every Air Force member are still annotated in the same manner (see Exhibit E).  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 11 Jan 02 for review and response within 30 days.  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 probable error or injustice in regard to his duty titles and the signatures dates on his OPR closing 12 March 1998.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we are not persuaded that he has substantiated that the duty titles or the OPR had a negative impact on the selection board members.  Therefore, we agree with the comments and recommendations of the Air Force concerning these issues and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that no error or injustice has been committed.

4.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice warranting his consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by SSB.  In this respect, we believe that the evidence provided substantiates that the DAFSC associated with his 6 October 1992 duty title on his OSB, incorrectly reflects a "V" prefix.  The "A" prefix indicates a commander position and based on the evidence of record, it appears that applicant was serving in a commander’s position.  In view of this determination, we recommend that the 6 October 1992 DAFSC be corrected accordingly.  In addition, we recommend his corrected record be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant 

colonel by SSB for the CY99A selection board.  We note applicant’s contentions concerning a smudge on the PRF prepared for the CY99A selection board and numerous marks on award citations were considered and we agree that the applicant should be allowed to have the PRF and the citations replaced with the marks removed.  We have been informed, based on our recommendation that since the applicant will be considered for promotion by SSB, he will be provided an opportunity to review his records and have these documents replaced prior to being considered for promotion by SSB.  Therefore, we recommend that his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Duty Air Force Specialty Code, effective 6 October 1992, be changed to reflect "A15W3" on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB).

It is further recommended that his record, to include the above corrected OSB, be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year 1999A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board and any subsequent boards in which the above correction was not a matter of record.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 01-02195 in Executive Session on 12 Feb 02, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

     Panel Chair
Member
Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jul 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 16 Nov 01, w/atch.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 3 Jan 02.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 11 Jan 02.

					

AFBCMR 01-02195

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Duty Air Force Specialty Code, effective 6 October 1992, be changed to reflect "A15W3" on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB).

	It is further directed that his record, to include the above corrected OSB, be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year 1999A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board and any subsequent boards in which the above correction was not a matter of record.