RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02498
		INDEX CODE:  107.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His officer selection brief (OSB) that met the CY00A central lieutenant colonel selection board be corrected to reflect that he had been awarded two Meritorious Service Medals (MSMs) instead of one.

2.  The Board Discrepancy Report in his officer selection record (OSR) be removed.

3.  He be considered for promotion for the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2000A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was placed at a competitive disadvantage at the calendar year 2000 Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (P0500A), In-the-Promotion Zone (IPZ) for two reasons:  (1) A discrepancy in the computerized portion of his OSR, known as the Air Force Officer Selection Brief erroneously indicated to the promotion board that he had been awarded only one MSM when, in fact, he had been awarded two; this discrepancy indicated to the promotion board that he had not received an MSM since 1993 when in fact, he received his second MSM in 1996; (2) this failure to correctly record the number of MSMs awarded caused a Board Discrepancy Report to be generated and placed in his OSR immediately after his Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 709 (PRF), indicating that an award, MSM 1 OLC, was not in his personnel data system, and that an inquiry had been sent to the servicing Military Personnel Flight to locate the document(s).

In support the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of his OSR, a copy of his declaration pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1746, and a copy his MSM, 1OLC paperwork.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on Extended Active Duty in the grade of major.

The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY00A and CY01B central lieutenant colonel selection boards.

Applicant’s Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) from 1991 through 2000 reflect “Meets Standards” on all performance factors.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO states that although the decoration was missing from his OSB, the citation was part of his OSR.  Additionally, the board discrepancy report in the applicant’s record reflects the MSM, 1OLC was awarded and filed, but not updated in the military personnel data system (MilPDS).  This would have called attention to the fact that there was a medal citation for that decoration in the OSR.  Since the board members had a copy of the citation to review and were aware of the level of the award, they do not support SSB consideration.

While it may be argued that the contested missing decoration on his OSB, from 6 years ago, was a factor in the applicant’s nonselection, there is no clear evidence that it negatively impacted his promotion opportunity.  Central boards evaluate the entire officer selection record (OSR) (including the promotion recommendation form, officer performance reports, officer effectiveness reports, training reports, letters of evaluation, decorations, and officer selection brief), assessing whole person factors such as job performance, professional qualities, depth and breadth of experience, leadership, and academic and professional military education.  They are not convinced the contested information contributed to the applicant’s nonselection.

In addition to the Officer Selection Brief (OPB) the applicant received for the CY00A board for his in-the-promotion zone (IPZ) consideration, they point out that he also received OPBs for his two below-the-promotion zone (BPZ) considerations by the CY99A and the CY99B central colonel selection boards with the identical error.  They question why the applicant did not attempt to challenge the contested award when he received the OPBs for these boards.  Each officer eligible for promotion received an 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.”  If the applicant had taken corrective action prior to his BPZ looks, his IPZ OSB would have been correct for the CY00A board.  Furthermore, although he states that he made multiple attempts to correct the deficiency and provided his military personnel flight (MPF) with a copy of the special orders awarding him the MSM, 1OLC, for updating in the system, he did not follow up on the correction until after he was notified of his nonselection for promotion.  They believe the applicant did not exercise reasonable diligence in attempting to ensure his record was correct prior to the CY00A board.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that the fact that two boards BPZ considered him is irrelevant.  First, the OPB and OSR are not sent to the member as they are for the IPZ board.  Secondly, he was realistic, knowing that he had no viable chance whatsoever of being picked up BPZ and therefore, manifested little, if any, interest in the state of his records at the time.  Thirdly, he chose to wait until after he received the results of his APZ board before pursuing this matter, a not unwarranted approach since five candidates were picked up APZ on that board.

The advisory opinion’s assertion that his claim lacks merit is interesting, and lacks merit itself.  It claims that the medal citation was in the OSR and presumably reviewed by the board members.  While in this advisory opinion they disagreed with his contention that the board was not likely to have the time or inclination to look past the OSB and parse through each and every piece of paper in the OSR, AFPC apparently agreed with his contention in September 1999.  AFPC is either not aware of its previous opinions or they are written for reasons of expediency.  Nevertheless, at an earlier point they agreed with his position that board members may, but are not likely to scour the entire OSR during the process, and rely heavily on the representation made in the OSB.

As to his exercise of reasonable diligence in having this matter corrected prior to the board in question, he reiterated his assertions concerning his efforts in the midst of his hectic travel schedule.

Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Although the MSM, 1st OLC was not reflected on the applicant’s OSB prepared for consideration by the 2000A central lieutenant colonel selection board, the citation was on file in his OSR.  In addition, his OSR contained a board discrepancy report showing that the MSM, 1st OLC was awarded and filed, but not updated in the military personnel data system (MilPDS).  Therefore, it is our opinion that the selection board members were well aware of the award.  We note that the central boards evaluate the entire officer record when making their assessments.  After reviewing all the evidence presented here, we are unpersuaded that the absence of the cited 1996 award on the applicant’s OSB caused his record to be so erroneous or misleading that the duly constituted selection board, vested with the discretionary authority to select officers for service in the higher grade, was unable to make a reasonable decision concerning the applicant’s promotability in relation to his peers.  In the absence of such evidence, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable action on this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 19 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 1 Aug 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 20 Nov 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 27 Nov 02.
	Exhibit E.	Applicant’s Letter, dated 16 Dec 02, w/atchs.