RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02765
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Officer Selection Brief (OSB) be corrected to include his current duty title of “Chief, Wing Codes Training”, the year of completion and school name for his Bachelor's degree, and his Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM).  

In addition he requests his corrected record be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for retention by the L0307B Reduction in Force (RIF) Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His OSB was critical to the decision made by the RIF board.  His twelve and one half years of faithful service was reduced to an incorrect and incomplete OSB.  His present duty position involves great responsibility within the Wing’s training program.  The missing data deprived the RIF board of seeing his true service and the ability to make an informed decision.  

In support of his request, applicant provides a copy of his Bachelor of Arts degree diploma, his AFAM certificate w/special order and an online official record reflecting his current duty title.  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 is currently serving on active duty in the grade of captain, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 2 Mar 05.  Applicant has a date of separation of 29 Jan 08.

The applicant’s Officer Selection Record (OSR) contains AF Forms 707B, Company Grade Officer Performance Reports, beginning with the rating period ending 30 Mar 02 and ending with the rating period ending 29 Mar 06, with overall ratings of “Meets Standards.”  In addition, his OSB contains an AF Form 475, Education/Training Report, documenting his completion of Officer Space Prerequisite Training (OSPT)/ICBM Operations Training (REACT-A).  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPAO states that the applicant’s duty title at the time of the RIF board should have read “ICBM CHIEF, WING CODES TRAINING” vice “ICBM WING CODES CONTROLLER.”  The AFPC/DPAO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial.  DPSOO states the applicant did not take the appropriate corrective action as directed in the Officer Preselection Brief instructions provided to each eligible officer prior to the convening of a board.  The applicant does not indicate what actions he took to either contact his MPF or anyone else in regards to documentation meeting the board. DPSOO advises that the applicant clearly did not exercise reasonable diligence to ensure his record was accurate prior to convening of the board.  The AFPC/DPSOO complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

AFIT/SCH states the applicant failed to contact the Coding Branch prior to the board convening for a records correction.  This is a common error in MilPDS as the conversion from the old PDS to the MilPDS system has caused data corruption in many records.  SCH advises it is ultimately the individual’s responsibility to identify these errors and seek corrective action prior to selection or other boards.  The applicant’s record has been updated as of 6 Sep 07 to reflect the Bachelor’s degree.  The AFIT/SCH complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Applicant states that if he knew there was more to his RIF folder than just the Retention Recommendation Form (RRF), he would have certainly exercised reasonable diligence to correct both existing mistakes in his decorations, academic degree and the mistakes of those who prepared the OSB.  He was never given any instruction on the RIF process.  He was verbally informed by those in his chain-of-command that he was eligible for the RIF and told the RRF would be what the decision was based on.  He was instructed not to write a letter to the board and to not worry about it any further because the entire process was merely a formality and there was no way he could be separated by the RIF.  With only a seven percent chance in his career field of being selected for non-retention, he believes the errors in the package reviewed by the board, played a key role in his nonselection for retention.  The applicant’s complete letter is at Exhibit G. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 have reviewed the available evidence pertaining to the applicant’s assertions and we are not persuaded that corrective action is warranted.  His contentions in this regard are duly noted; however, we agree with the Air Force offices of primary responsibility that it appears he did not exercise due diligence to ensure his OPB was accurate prior to the RIF board.  Therefore, we adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence showing what actions he took prior to the board convening which demonstrates “reasonable diligence” in the maintenance of his records, we do not believe SSB consideration is appropriate.  

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 Docket Number BC-2007-02765, in Executive Session on 8 Nov 07, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2007-02765 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Aug 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 27 Sep 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 25 Oct 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFIT/SCH, dated 6 Sep 07.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 07.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Oct 07.