RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01849

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Officer Selection Record (OSR) be corrected to include the award of the Air Force Meritorious Service Medal, 1st Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM 1OLC), his duty title entry corrected and he receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel for the Calendar Year 2001B (CY01B) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board that convened 5 Nov 01.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was awarded the second MSM 1OLC, but it was not included in his records.  Therefore, when his records met the CY01B Lt Col board, this decoration was not in his records.  In Oct 01, he was unable to review his officer preselection brief due to a short notice TDY from 2 Oct through 16 Nov 01 in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.  He did not return to Hurlburt Field until after the completion of the 5 Nov 01 CY01B board.

In addition, his duty title should be corrected to read “Chief, Space Plans and Integration.”

In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a personal letter, copies of the MSM, Special Orders and the officer preselection brief.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of major.

Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant by the CY99A, CY99B, CY00A and CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.

On 18 Oct 01, the applicant forwarded a personal letter to the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board addressing his past duties and responsibilities.

Presently, the applicant’s records have been updated in the military personnel data system to reflect the requested corrections.

OPR profile since 1993 follows: 

           PERIOD ENDING          EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL 

			19 Nov 94	Meets Standards (MS)
			19 Nov 95				(MS)			
			04 Nov 96				(MS)
		04 Nov 97				(MS)
			04 Nov 98				(MS)
			01 Sep 99				(MS)
		01 Sep 00				(MS)
		20 May 01				(MS)
____________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO deferred to AFPC/DPPPO (See comments made by this office) for Special Selection Board consideration. 

AFPC/DPAO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial.  DPPPO agrees that his MSM, 1OLC citation was not in his record or reflected on his officer selection brief (OSB).  However, each officer eligible for promotion received an officer preselection brief (OPB) 90-100 days prior to the central board convening date.  The OPB contains data that will appear on the OSB at the central board.  Written instructions attached to the OPB and given to the officer before the central selection board specifically instruct him to carefully examine the brief for completeness and accuracy.  If any errors are found, he must take corrective action prior to the selection board, not after it.  The instructions specifically state, Officers will not be considered by a Special Selection Board if, in exercising reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error or omission in his/her records and could have taken timely corrective action.”  Additionally, the written instructions advise the applicant to request a copy of his selection folder from HQ AFPC/DPPBR1, or contact the records clerk by telephone in order to ensure the contents of his record are accurate and complete.  The applicant did not provide any evidence that he exercised “reasonable diligence” in attempting to ensure his record was correct or corrected prior to departing TDY on 2 Oct 01.  Therefore, SSB consideration is not warranted. 

Regarding the applicant’s contention of an incorrect 27 Jun 01 duty title, our research shows that the applicant wrote a letter to the board, dated 18 Oct 01 that addresses his previous and present duty titles.  He signed the letter as “Chief, Space Plans and Integration,” so the board members were aware of his correct duty title.  The military personnel data system now reflects the correct duty history entry; however, we are not convinced this error was the direct cause of his nonselection for promotion.

While it may be argued the missing MSM, 1OLC citation and incorrect OSB were factors in the applicant’s nonselection; there is no clear evidence that either negatively impacted his promotion opportunity.  Central boards evaluate the entire OSR (including the promotion recommendation form, officer performances reports, officer effectiveness reports, training reports, letters of evaluation, decorations, and officer selection brief), assessing the whole person factors such as job performance, professional qualities, depth and breadth of experience, leadership, and academic and professional military education.  As such, DPPPO is not convinced the missing decoration and incorrect OSB contributed to the applicant’s nonselection.  Based on the evidence provided, DPPPO recommends denial.

AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and stated that the statement concerning his four nonselections to the grade of lieutenant colonel is accurate, but he contends it is not relevant to this request.  This request is for the CY01B selection board and not the previous three promotion boards.  Furthermore, it is prejudicial to include this information in a recommendation for a SSB, because each promotion board is a new opportunity that should be evaluated separately and distinctly from previous board information.  

He also stated that he was unable to review his officer preselection brief (OPB), and paragraph c stated he received his OPB 90-100 days prior to central board convening date.  Although this is the correct process, it assumes he received his OPB prior to going TDY in Oct 01.  In fact, he did not have an opportunity to review his OPB, because he changed duty assignments in Jun 01.  His OPB arrived at his new duty station (Hurlburt Field) while he was TDY in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.  He agrees it is his responsibility to review his records regardless of military duties and assignments; however, from Sep-Nov 01, his primary focus was to support Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.  As a result, he did not return to Hurlburt Field until after the completion of the 5 Nov 01, CY01B Lt Col board.

He respectfully requests the opportunity for his records to meet a SSB, since his records met the CY01B Lt Col board without the correct documentation.

Applicant’s complete response 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 haws been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record, the majority of the Board is not convinced that the applicant exercised reasonable diligence in having his record up-to-date prior to the convening of the selection board in question.  Applicant states that he was not able to review his preselection brief prior to the CY01B selection board due to a short notice TDY from 2 October 2001 to 16 November 2001.  The majority of the Board does not agree.  In this respect, the majority of the Board notes that the applicant submitted a letter to the board president of the CY01B selection board dated 18 October 2001 commenting on his new duty assignment.  Therefore, the majority of the Board believes that if he had the time to write a letter to the board in question, he should have taken the time to review his records.  Furthermore,  the majority of the Board also notes that he has not provided sufficient evidence to show he did not receive his selection brief 90 days prior to the convening of the selection board.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the majority of the Board does not recommend favorable action on this application. 
_________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-01849 in Executive Session on 15 January 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

A majority of the Board voted to deny the application. Mr. Gallogly voted to correct the records but does not wish to submit a Minority Report. The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 24 May 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 25 Jul 02.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 1 Nov 02.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Nov 02.
	Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response, dated 27 Nov 02.

	Panel Chair

MEMORANDUM FOR	THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
				FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:	AFBCMR Application of APPLICANT

	I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that the application be denied.

	Please advise the applicant accordingly.

							Director
							Air Force Review Boards Agency