RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03540
		INDEX CODE:  131.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Correction be made to his duty title and organization on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) for CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board and he be consideration for promotion by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY01B selection board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Even after his personal attention and the assurances of others to correct the record, his OSB reflected the wrong duty title and organization.  He believes that this omission denied the board the opportunity to see his upward movement in the Wing structure and therefore proved detrimental to his promotion opportunity.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

He is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of major.  He was assigned to the 3rd Operations Group as Chief, Fighter Branch, Group Standardization and Evaluation Division, at Elmendorf AFB, AK, on 5 June 2001.  The duty title reflected on the OSB was that of Assistant Operations Officer.

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

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO states that the applicant’s CY01 Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board Officer Selection Brief did display inaccurate duty history information when it met the board.  DPAO confirms that the applicant’s duty history has been corrected and verified by AFPC/DPAOC.  DPAO defers to AFPC/DPPPO’s decision regarding the applicant being considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB).  

AFPC/DPAO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial.  DPPPO recognizes the fact that the applicant’s OSB did not reflect his correct duty title but they note that the correct duty title was listed on the applicant’s Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) and states their belief that the board was able to distinguish the difference between duty information on the OSB and duty information on the PRF.

DPPPO maintains that because the board considers 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 that the erroneous duty title contributed to the applicant’s nonselection for promotion.  

AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant contends that DPPPO’s statement that there was no clear evidence that the omission of the applicant’s duty title from his OSB negatively impacted his chances for promotion is flawed.  Applicant takes issue with DPPPO’s contention that board members should have been able to distinguish between the incorrect information on the OSB and the correct information on the PRF by stating that it’s entirely possible that the board looked at the discrepancy in a negative light as if the applicant’s attention to detail was defective.  Applicant feels that the board was more likely to focus on the more “user friendly” duty history column and conclude that the applicant had stagnated in the same position for over two years.

Applicant contends that while he made every endeavor to have the discrepancy corrected prior to the board, his efforts were for naught.  Applicant’s argument is that an inaccurate OSB could not have enhanced his chances at being selected for promotion rather than DPPPO’s contention that it did not have any impact at all.

Applicant concludes that the OSB presented to the board did not reflect an important career achievement.  For DPPPO to assume that the board could differentiate between the two duty titles in the few seconds they had to review each record was to deny the applicant an equal opportunity to compete with his peers.

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After thoroughly reviewing the complete case file, the Board noted that while the applicant's Promotion Recommendation Form reflected the correct duty title and organization as "Chief, Fighter Branch, Group Standardization and Evaluation Division", his Officer Selection Brief did not reflect his correct duty title and organization.  While the Board cannot determine what impact these omissions would have had on the outcome of the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, the Board is persuaded that they deprived him of full and fair consideration.  In view of the foregoing and in an effort to remove any possibility of an injustice to the applicant, we recommend that his record be corrected in the following manner.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Officer Selection Brief prepared for the Calendar Year 2001 (CYO1B) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection board be amended to reflect his proper duty title entry of “Chief, Fighter Branch, Group Standardization and Evaluation Division” rather than “Assistant Operations Officer” effective 5 June 2001.

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board for the CY01B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2002-03540 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Oct 02, w/atch’s. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAO, dated 18 Nov 02, W/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ/AFPC/DPPPO, dated 22 Jan 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant Rebuttal, dated 25 Feb 03.

                                   

BC-2002-03540

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 his Officer Selection Brief, prepared for consideration by CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, be corrected to reflect a duty title of "Chief, Fighter Branch, Group Standardization and Evaluation Division," rather than “Assistant Operations Officer” effective 5 June 2001: and, he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board for the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board.