RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02440 INDEX CODE:	131.00
COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration by the CY07B (P0507B) Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Central Selection Board (CSB) with the inclusion of his Air Force Commendation Medals (AFCMs) First and Second Oak Leaf Clusters (OLCs) and the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) citations in his Officer Selection Record (OSR).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His P0507B Lt Col promotion record did not accurately reflect the number of Air Force Commendation Medals (AFCMs) he received or include a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) that should have been awarded in 2007. Due to unknown reasons, the Automated Records Management System (ARMS) reflected two AFCM First Oak Leaf Clusters (OLCs) when it should have reflected an AFCM First OLC and an AFCM Second OLC.

Additionally, his supervisor failed to submit an MSM package upon completion of his respective tour of duty. Unfortunately, these errors in his record were not discovered until after the results from the P0507B Lt Col CSB were posted. He strongly believes these missing decorations in his records significantly affected his chances for promotion to Lt Col.

In support of his request, the applicant provided copies of his AFCM and MSM certificates and an e-mail from his supervisor.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was considered and non-selected for promotion by the P0507B Lt Col CSB on 27 Nov 07. The applicant’s MSM was awarded on 2 Jun 08 and could not have been updated in the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) when the board convened.

In accordance with AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Awards and Decorations Programs, decoration recommendations are entered ‘‘into official channels within two (2) years and awarded within three (3) years of the act, achievement, or service performed.’’

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial of the applicant’s request for SSB consideration. DPSOO states the applicant has not demonstrated he exercised reasonable due diligence in maintaining his record. Each officer eligible for promotion by the P0507B CSB was provided with an Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) several months prior to the selection board. The OPB mirrors the data that will appear on the OSB at the central board. The written instructions attached to the OPB specifically instruct the officer to carefully examine the brief for completeness and accuracy. The instructions state that to ensure their records are 100 percent accurate, eligible officers should request a copy of their record from AFPC (Officer Records). The same instructions advise the officer to contact the records technician by telephone to go over the contents of their records. In accordance with governing instructions, officers have the responsibility to ensure the accuracy of their OSB and OSR at AFPC prior to the board convening date.

Additionally, in regards to the applicant’s AFCMs and MSM, DPSOO states necessary measures have been taken to correct his citation in ARMS.

The complete AFPC/DPSOO complete evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
He strongly disagrees with the AFPC/DPSOO opinion and believes he has demonstrated reasonable diligence in maintaining his records. Mistakes were made and data was missing, but in reality the MSM was not completed due to a lack of leadership as admitted by his supervisor and the AFCMs were misfiled/lost due to administrative incompetence outside his span of control.

He is an A-10 weapons officer who has spent his entire career preparing squadrons for combat, leading them in combat, and prioritizing all of that above self. He has never cared about recognition or medals until now because it unfortunately, negatively affected his chances for promotion to Lt Col. He should be spending his time and energy focusing on the fight in the area of responsibility rather than attempting to correct an error in his records.

The	applicant's	complete	response,	with	attachments,	is	at Exhibit D.

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 took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis 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 Docket Number BC- 2008-02440 in Executive Session on 17 December 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member

The	following	documentary	evidence	was	considered	for	Docket Number BC-2008-02440:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 3 Nov 08. Exhibit C.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 08.
Exhibit D.	Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 27 Nov 08, w/atchs.