RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02142
		INDEX NUMBER:  131.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and his “as met” Officer Selection Record (OSR) for the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Selection Board be corrected to reflect the appropriate duty assignment history.

He be considered for promotion to lieutenant colonel by special selection board (SSB) for the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Promotion Selection Board with the corrected record.

__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His OSB did not correctly reflect his duty assignment as an Executive Officer during the period between 14 May 98 and 6 Jul 99.  He reviewed the Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) that was provided to him prior to the board and assumed it was correct since it reflected his executive officer Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC).  During a post board review, personnel at HQ AFPC informed him that his duty title was incorrect and reflected “Intel Officer” vice “Executive Officer.”  He was advised that the incorrect duty title might have indicated to the board that he had a short tenure as an Executive Officer.

His duty history has since been corrected.

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

__________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is presently serving on active duty in the grade of major.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date is 10 Nov 85.  The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY01B (5 Nov 01) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.  A review of his last ten officer performance reports (OPRS) reflects overall ratings of “meets standards.”

__________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO confirms that the OSB for the applicant’s CY01 Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board was missing the 97EO Duty AFSC as Executive Officer to the Commander, Aerospace C2 & ISR Center.  They also confirm that the applicant’s records have since been corrected.  They defer to the recommendation of AFPC/DPPPO contained in the following advisory regarding the applicant’s request for promotion consideration by SSB.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial of the applicant’s request for promotion consideration by SSB.

Eligible officers are provided an OPB approximately 100 days prior to the board convening date.  Along with the OPB, members are provided instructions on how to get discrepancies corrected prior to the board convening.  The applicant received this sheet in early August 2001.  He has not provided any information regarding what action he took prior to the board convening to ensure that his records were correct.

There is no clear evidence that the incorrect duty title negatively impacted his promotion opportunity.  Central boards evaluate the entire officer selection record, assessing whole person factors such as job performance, professional qualities, depth and breadth of experience, leadership, and academic and professional military education.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

__________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 27 November 2002 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

__________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the majority of the Board agrees with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopts their rationale as the primary basis for their conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Applicant received his Officer Preselection Brief and the majority of the Board believes that he failed to exercise reasonable diligence to ensure that his records were corrected prior to the convening of the selection board in question.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board majority finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

__________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

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

__________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-02142 in Executive Session on 16 January 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

By a majority vote, the Board voted to deny applicant’s request.  Mr. voted to grant the applicant’s requests but did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jun 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPAO, dated 15 Aug 02.
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 20 Nov 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 27 Nov 02.

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

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX

	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.