RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-03173
		INDEX CODE:  131.09

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2007B (CY07B) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Board Discrepancy Report filed in his Officer Selection Record (OSR) incorrectly stated that the OSR was missing a decoration.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of the Board Discrepancy Report.

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, with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 Sep 03.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 2 Jun 93.

Applicant's Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile since 2000 follows:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION

	26 Aug 00	Meets Standards
	26 Aug 01	Meets Standards
	26 Aug 02	Meets Standards
	26 Aug 03	Meets Standards
	30 Jun 04	Meets Standards
Applicant's Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile since 2000 continues:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION

	30 Jun 05	Meets Standards
	30 Jun 06	Meets Standards
  #	22 May 07	Meets Standards

# Top Report at the time that he was considered and nonselected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY07B Lieutenant Colonel CSB.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial indicating they reviewed the record and noted the contested Board Discrepancy Report was correct, as it indicated the Air Force Achievement Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFAM, 2OLC) was not in the MilPDS.  The OSB shows the number of awarded AFAMs to be “2” instead of “3.”  Although the AFAM, 2OLC was not reflected on his OSB, the citation was filed in his record and was available to the board members for consideration in the promotion process.  Additionally, the applicant did not exercise reasonable diligence in ensuring the OSB was accurate prior to the convening of the board.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnishes a response indicating he takes exception to the statement that he did not exercise reasonable diligence in ensuring his OSB was accurate.  He provided information pertaining to the decoration for inclusion in his record and was assured prior to the CY07B board that it was in his record.  He was surprised to discover the discrepancy report in his record, which he believes was potentially a discriminating factor for his selection for promotion.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted.  However, we do not find the documentation presented in support of his appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR).  Notwithstanding his assertion, we are not persuaded the applicant exercised the necessary diligence to ensure the accuracy of his record prior to the CY07B board.  Therefore, in the absence of sufficient evidence to the contrary, we agree with the recommendation of the OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of establishing that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Accordingly, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-03173 in Executive Session on 4 Dec 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXXXXXXX, Chair
	XXXXXXXXXX, Member
	XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Aug 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 3 Oct 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 08.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, applicant, dated 13 Nov 08.

                                   XXXXXXXXXX
                                   Chair