RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01209
		INDEX CODE:  107.00; 131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  20 SEPTEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The following corrections be made to his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and he be granted a Special Selection Board (SSB):

	1)  Under duty title, the 16 Oct 06 entry be changed to read:

"2 Dec 05, Q111F3G, Chief, Command & Ctrl/F-15E FE, WB, AFE, FIGHTER WING, LAKENHEATH."

	2)  Under decorations:

		(a) add Distinguished Flying Cross, 2007, 1;

		(b) change YR and NR for Merit Svc Med to read "2004" and "2," respectively;

		(c) change YR and NR for Air Medal to read "2006" and "3," respectively.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) was submitted for approval in Feb 06, shortly after his deployment.  The citation was signed just over one month before his Permanent Change of Station (PCS); however, the Special Order (SO) was not issued until 22 Feb 07.

His second Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) was absent from his Officer Selection Record (OSR).  He was assured that the medal would be in his records before the promotion board met.

His two Air Medals (AM) were absent from his OSR.  The original paperwork was misplaced during processing, but have since been resubmitted for approval.

In support of the application, the applicant submits his personal statement, a copy of the SO, citation and award for the DFC, a copy of the SO, award, and support letter for the MSM, and copies of his AM justification sheets (2).

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) indicates the applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date is 1 Jun 92.  He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major, effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 02.  The applicant has one nonselection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY06C (28 Nov 06) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board (CSB).

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPAO recommends correcting the applicant's duty history as per his request.  DPAO defers the SSB consideration to HQ AFPC/DPPPO.

The complete DPAO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial.  DPPPO states what was actually incorrect on his OSB was the effective date, MAJCOM and organization of his duty title.  However, his corresponding Officer Performance Report for the period in question reflected the correct information.  

DPPPO states the decoration award authority announces its final decision when approving an award by publishing orders.  The orders serve as the source document decision when approving an award and when updating the decorations in the MilPDS which is subsequently reflected on the OSB.  As the SO for the MSM (1OLC) was published on 16 Mar 07 and the DFC on 22 Feb 07, the citations were not filed in the applicant's OSR and updated on his OSB for the CY06C CSB.  Additionally, decoration recommendations are entered into official channels within 2 years and awarded within 3 years of the act, achievement, or service performed.  The decorations were processed in a timely manner, and there is no compelling reason to include decoration in the applicant's OSR that did not exist prior to the convening of the board.

The applicant was aware that he had been recommended for two AM's and should have elected to write a letter to the board members prior to the convening of the board informing them of the decorations.  The AM justification sheet is not authorized to be filed in the OSR.

The complete DPPPO evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response dated 22 Jun 07, the applicant states that three significant omissions in his official record caused his nonselection.  He initiated corrective action through his Military Personnel Flight (MPF).  He states the MSM was not written when it was supposed to be written (Oct 06) and he has attached a letter stating the administrative oversight.  

Several medals for other members, along with his DFC, were written and submitted for processing at the same time.  He inquired on a monthly basis for the status of the DFC up until his PCS, and was told the medal was being staffed.  He alleges all the other medals were processed and updated in MilPDS for the affected members before the end of Oct 06.  His DFC citation was signed by the recommending officer in Sep 06 – one full month before his PCS.  The SO was produced on 22 Feb 07.  This action took five months to complete; not timely processing.  If the responsible office had processed the award in a timely manner, it would have been updated in MilPDS and reflected on his OSR before the CY06C board convened.

He was not aware he could write a letter to the board regarding the AM's.  

He concludes there is no such thing as an infallible process and sometimes oversights lead to an incorrect outcome.  He firmly believes that had the three issues been correct in his OSR for the CY06C board, the outcome would have been different.  

The 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 has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice warranting corrective action by this Board.  In this respect, applicant contends his OSR contained numerous errors when his record was considered by the CY06C lieutenant colonel selection board.  Applicant contends that various decorations were absent from his OSR.  We carefully reviewed the evidence of record along with the documentation provided in support of his appeal.  However, we agree with the Air Force's position that since the DFC and MSM (1OLC) were not officially approved until after the selection board adjourned, they were not a matter of record and therefore, not required to be included in his CY06C OSR.  We agree with the Air Force that justification sheets for awards and decorations are not authorized for inclusion in OSRs and it is our opinion as well that allowing the applicant to do so would provide him an unfair advantage over his peers.  Amongst the errors identified by the applicant was that the 2 Dec 05 duty title reflected on his OSB was incorrect.  Information provided by the Air Force and a review of the evidence of record verifies that the duty title section of his OSB apparently contained a discrepancy and data currently contained in the Military Personnel Data Systems indicates the information has been subsequently corrected.  We carefully weighed whether or not SSB consideration was warranted as a result of this error.  However, noting the Air Force's assessment that the correct duty title was reflected on his OPR covering the contested period and therefore, available to the selection board members, and finding no persuasive evidence that this discrepancy in and of itself, caused his nonselection for promotion, we agree with the Air Force that SSB consideration was not warranted. In other words, we believe the minor errors constitutes nothing more than harmless error.  Therefore, in view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis upon which 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 1 Aug 07, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2007-01209:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Apr 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAO, dated 23 Apr 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPO, dated 31 May 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jun 07.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, 22 Jun 07.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair