RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02540
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Officer Selection Brief (OSB) be corrected to include his correct assignment history and his corrected record be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration by the Calendar Year 2007B (CY07B) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB).  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was TDY during the time his OSB was created and he did not get to review it.  He did review his SURF on the VMPF; however, he was unaware of the errors in his OSB until a records review was conducted after his non-selection for promotion.  From Jun 99 through Oct 02, he was assigned to AFOAT, Northwest Region AFROTC and from Oct 02 through Oct 05, he was assigned to HQ SOCEUR in EUCOM.

In support of his request, applicant provides a copy of his Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) for the periods ending 1 Jun 00 to 14 Oct 05.  

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 major, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jun 03.  The applicant has one non-selection to the grade of lieutenant colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPASL states that the organizations AFELM SOCEUR EUC RAMSTEIN effective 2 Jun 02 and AFROTC NW REG CHICAGO effective 15 Jul 99, have been corrected effective 29 Jul 08.  The complete AFPC/DPASL evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.  

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial.  DPPPO states that taking into consideration that the assignment history entries may have been incorrect when the board convened; the board members still had information which showed the applicant's correct assignment data.  Specifically, his corresponding OPRs communicated to the board the correct data.  DPSOO advises that correcting his OSB to include the corrected duty history data would not introduce any new information that was not already considered by the board members.  The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C.    

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were sent to the applicant on 24 Oct 08 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has not received a response. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 correct duty history at the time the board convened; however, evidence supports that his OPRs had the information which showed the applicant's correct assignment data.  In view of this fact, we are 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.  Based on the facts of this case, we believe the applicant has received fair and equitable consideration for promotion through the selection board process.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Officer Promotions and Appointments Branch and adopt its rationale as the basis for our findings in the case.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request 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-2008-02540 in Executive Session on 11 Dec 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2008-02540 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jun 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPASL, dated 12 Aug 08, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 6 Oct 08
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 08.

                     			
								Panel Chair