RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01887
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 6 Sep 01 duty title entry be corrected to reflect “ST, KC-135 CMBT EMPLOYMENT SCHL” on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY06C Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The selection board’s ability to accurately assess his record was hampered due to a duty history omission for weapons school accomplishment.  Through the years he has diligently maintained his records.  

In support of his request, applicant provides a supporting letter from his former wing commander, a copy of his OSB and duty history information print-out.  

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) indicates the applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date as 21 Mar 93.  He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major, with a date of rank of 1 Apr 03.  MilPDS reflects his assignment history effective 6 Sep 01 as “ST, KC-135 CMBT EMPLOYMENT SCHL.”

He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY06C lieutenant colonel CSB.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO recommends the missing duty title be inserted in the applicant’s OSB.  DPAO advises that the duty title omission may have had a minor impact on the boards’ awareness that he was a weapons school graduate.  The AFPC/DPAO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial.  DPPPO states that the applicant has not provided any documentation to show what action was taken prior to the board to correct the error on his OSB.  The applicant did not exercise reasonable diligence in ensuring his record was accurate prior to the CSB, therefore, DPPPO recommends the request for SSB be denied.  The AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.   

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant indicates he is a near expert maintainer of his records.  He personally initiated and closed five corrections and updates which were very challenging due to the 500 days he was TDY.  He believes his omitted duty history was a major factor towards his non-selection as compared to his peers.  He executed everything he could to insure his records were ready and through no fault of anyone, the system did not keep up during a crucial evaluation point in his very successful career.  The applicant’s complete letter, with attachments, 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 an injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we note the applicant’s OSB did not reflect the 2001 “W” prefix of a weapons school graduate at the time the board convened; however, evidence supports that his Education/Training Report and subsequent lines in his duty history reflected the “W” prefix.  In view of this fact, the Board majority is not persuaded that the absence of this information on his OSB caused his record to be so erroneous or misleading that the duly constituted selection board, vested with the authority to score officer’s records for promotion, was unable to reach a reasonable decision concerning his promotability in relation to his peers.  It is the Board majority’s opinion, based on the facts of this case, that the applicant has received fair and equitable consideration for promotion through the selection board process.  The applicant has not provided any evidence to show he was treated differently than other members in his same situation.  Therefore, a majority of the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Officer Promotions and Appointments Branch and adopts its rationale as the basis for the Board majority findings in the case.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request for SSB consideration is not favorably considered.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 BC-2007-01887, in Executive Session on 8 Nov 07, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the application.  XXXXXXXXXX voted to correct the record as requested but did not wish to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Jun 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 6 Jul 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 9 Aug 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Sep 07.
    Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 11 Oct 07, w/atchs.