RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01704 (Case 2)
		INDEX CODE:  131.00, 131.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for promotion to lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY01B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board (P0501B), with the corrected assignment history on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His OSB reflected incorrect command levels when his record met the P0501B selection board.  Specifically, the assignment history section, with the 6 Apr 98 and 15 Aug 00 effective dates, erroneously reflected his command level as “Wing/Base” (W/B) instead of “Numbered Air Force” (NAF).

In support of his request, applicant submits a statement from the 95MSS.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 11 Sep 86.  He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major, with an effective date and date of rank of 1 Aug 98.  He received 5 Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) in the grade of major, in which the overall evaluations were “Meets Standards.”  The Officer Performance Report (OPR), closing 14 Sep 01, was the top report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY01B Central Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 5 Nov 01.

The applicant's initial request for correction of his assignment history was administratively corrected; i.e., the command levels for the 6 Apr 98 and 15 Aug 00 entries were changed from “W/B” (Wing/Base) to “CN” (Center).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

HQ AFPC/DPAO states that the applicant’s duty level while assigned to the AFFTC was “W/B” (Wing/Base).  However, HQ AFMC/DPMO indicates that the applicant’s position is a NAF equivalent and should be reflected as such.  Accordingly, the applicant’s duty history has been changed to “Center” (AFMC’s equivalent to a NAF (Numbered Air Force)).  DPAO defers to DPPPOO for SSB consideration.  The HQ AFPC/DPAO evaluations, with attachments, are at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPO, recommends the application be denied.  DPPPO stated that while the applicant may argue errors in the command level in his duty history played a role in his nonselection for promotion, there is no clear evidence that it negatively impacted his promotion opportunity.  In addition, coded information on the OSB, such as the command level that is reflected in an officer’s duty history, is also reflected elsewhere in the record.  Every officer performance report (OPR) and promotion recommendation form (PRF) in the officer’s record reflects the command level for each assignment.  DPPPO does not believe the administrative errors in the applicant’s command level duty history caused his nonselection for promotion and therefore does not recommend granting SSB consideration.  The HQ AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions and disagrees with HQ AFPC/DPPPO’s recommendation.  The Officer “Preselection” Brief is the top item in an officer’s promotion package.  As a member of the board reviewed the brief for an O-5 candidate, they will undoubtedly look for the level of positions held by each applicant.  Since his position was coded incorrectly, not finding a position in his brief above, the Wing/Base level may have biased the board.  He believes the SSB reviewing his record now after the corrections have been made is the only way for a just and fair review for promotion.

In support of the applicant’s request, an indorsement by his current commander has been provided.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________

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 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 appropriate Air Force office (HQ AFPC/DPPPO) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an injustice.  While it is true the command level on applicant’s Officer Selection Brief (OSB) was incorrect at the time he was considered for promotion by the CY01B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, we note that the command level for each assignment is also reflected on the Officer Performance Report (OPR) and Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF).  Since selection boards review the entire officer record, applicant’s duty history was available for review on his OPRs at the time of the cited promotion consideration.  In our opinion, it is highly unlikely the contested command level information was the cause of his nonselection.  In the absence of evidence indicating the applicant’s record was so erroneous or misleading that the duly constituted selection board was unable to make a reasonable decision concerning his standing in relation 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 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 10 Mar 03, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number 02-01704.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 May 02, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letters, HQ AFPC/DPAO, dated 10 Jun 02, w/atchs,
               And 6 Aug 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 22 Nov 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 02.
   Exhibit F.  Letter from Applicant, dated 3 Jan 03, w/atch.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair