RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03918 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) on his Officer Selection Brief (OSB) be corrected to reflect “K11M3K” rather than “11M3K,” effective 1 Jan 05; and that his corrected record receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel for the Calendar Year 2010A (CY10A) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB). ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The “K” prefix signifies that he is an instructor pilot, a qualification which is only held by 21 percent of pilots. The error on the OSB is unjust because it does not properly reflect his timely professional development as an aviator. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his OSB for the CY10A CSB; a copy of his Officer Performance Report, closing 11 Nov 05 and other supporting documents. The applicant complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was promoted to the grade of major with an effective date and Date of Rank (DOR) of 1 May 2006. He was considered and nonselected by the CY10A Lieutenant Colonel CSB, which convened on 8 March 2010. The applicant’s OPR profile of the last ten reports follows: PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 27 Mar 02 Training Report (TR) 11 Nov 02 Meet Standards (MS) 27 Jun 03 TR 11 Nov 03 MS 11 Nov 04 MS 11 Nov 05 MS 11 Nov 06 MS 11 Nov 07 MS 11 Nov 08 MS #01 Nov 09 MS # Top report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion by the CY10A Lieutenant Colonel CSB. AFPC/DPAOM2 has administratively corrected the applicant’s record in the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) to reflect the “K” prefix. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAOM2 recommends the applicant’s record be considered by SSB. They note the absence of the “K” prefix on the AFSC, in the applicant’s duty history, does not accurately represent the timing of his Instructor Pilot upgrade qualification. The complete AFPC/DPAOM2 evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial, stating, in part, the applicant did not exercise reasonable diligence to ensure the data in the Assignment History section was correct prior to the convening of the board. They note, although the OSB may have contained a DAFSC error in the assignment history section, his respective OPRs communicated to the promotion board members the correct information The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 17 Dec 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case. While we note the comments of the functional manager; we are in agreement with the opinion and recommendation of the Chief, Officer Promotions and Appointments Branch, noting that while the OSB may have contained a DAFSC error in the assignment history section, the applicant’s OPRs communicated to the promotion board members the correct information. Therefore, the corrected duty history data would not introduce any new information that was not already considered by board members. In addition, the error could have been corrected had the applicant carefully reviewed his officer pre-selection brief (OPB) prior to the board as directed in the instructions provided to each eligible officer before the convening of the CSB. Consequently, we believe that he failed to exercise reasonable diligence in not discovering the error regarding his duty history prior to the convening of the board. In view of this and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-03918 in Executive Session on 19 July 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Oct 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAOM2, dated 21 Oct 10. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 16 Nov 10. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 10.