RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01408 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His duty history be updated to reflect “C-130J Aircraft Maintenance Unit (AMU) Officer in Charge (OIC)” as his duty title for the period 15 Feb 12 to 2 Jan 13. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The duty title in question is missing from his records. He held this position from 15 Feb 12 through 2 Jan 13. He provided an AF Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru CMSgt), where he signed as the additional rater with the duty title of “C-130J/Gold AMU OIC” as proof he held the position. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of first lieutenant (O-2). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPALO recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. There is no evidence to confirm the applicant held the position of C-130J AMU OIC. His officer performance report (OPR) for the period closing 4 Mar 12, which includes part of the timeframe in question, reflects his duty title as “Assistant OIC, C-130H Aircraft Maintenance Unit.” Furthermore, the EPR provided by the applicant cannot serve as proof of his duty title as a matter of record as the report pertains to someone else. Additionally, the requested duty title of C-130J AMU OIC is not reflected on the EPR. The applicant’s duty title as of 7 Jan 13 was Support Flight Commander. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPALO evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 3 May 13 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office). ________________________________________________________________ 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 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, 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-2013-01408 in Executive Session on 23 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Mar 13, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPALO, dated 15 Apr 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 May 13. Panel Chair