AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03761 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
1.  The close out date of the Meritorious Service Medal, 2nd Oak 
Leaf  Cluster  (MSM  20LC)  for  the  period  13  August  1988  to 
22 September 1995, be changed to something after 16 October 1995. 
2. 
His  records,  to  include  an  Officer  Selection  Brief  (OSB) 
reflecting award of the MSM 20LC, be considered for promotion to 
the  grade  of  colonel by  Special Selection Board  (SSB) for  the 
Calendar Year 1996 (CY96) Central Colonel Board. 

r 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

He  arrived  at  his  new  duty  station  on  30  October  1995. 
He 
received notice of the pending promotion board  for 0-6 and made 
numerous  attempts to  get  this  award  noted  in  his  records.  He 
worked  with  the  Military  Personnel  Flight  (MPF) to  update  the 
data  and  felt confident that  his  records were  updated.  He was 
nonselected for promotion and had not reviewed his rekords until 
he  received notification of the next board that his records did 
not properly reflect the award.  The close out date of the MSM, 
20LC should be changed and his records should be submitted for a 
supplemental board after his rater has  the chance to review his 
promotion  recommendation  as  he  believes  it  could  hao-hd 
an 
impact. 

- 

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the 
grade of lieutenant colonel. 
Applicant  was  considered  and  not  selected for promotion  to  the 
grade of colonel by the CY95B, CY96B and CY97B boards. 

97-03761 

OPR profile since 1991, follows: 

PERIOD ENDING 

20 Jun 91 
20 Jun 92 
15 May 93 
15 May 94 
#15 May 95 
##15 May 96 
###15 May 97 

EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 

#Top report on file at time of the CY95B Central Colonel BoaEd. 
##Top report on file at time of the CY96B Central Colonel Board. 
###Top report on file at time of the CY97B Central Colonel Board. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The  Chief,  Promotion,  Evaluation  and  Recognition  Division, 
AFPC/DPPP, reviewed the application and states that the applicant 
contends the close out date for the MSM, 20LC should be some time 
after  16 October 1995 instead  of 22  September  1995, yet  he  did 
not  include  anything,  such  as  an  amended  citation  or  special 
series order,  to  substantiate his  contention.  Therefore, they 
conclude  the  closeout  date  of  the  award  is  accurate. 
They 
further  state  that  they  agree  with  the  applicant‘s  contention 
that the MSM,  20LC, was not  reflected on his OSB  for the CY96B 
board.  However, the citation was filed in his OSR on 11 December 
1995 and was, therefore, in evidence for review by the promotion 
board  and  factored  into  the  original  promotion  evaluation. 
Although  the  applicant  claims  he  was  in  constant  cqmunication 
with the MPF from the time he arrived on station in October 1995, 
he  failed to provide  any documentation of  his  efforts prior  to 
the promotion board held in December 1996.  The copies of the two 
pages  from the records review rip were  extracted from Personnel 
Concepts I11 (PCIII) in December 1997.  There is no documentation 
of the applicant’s efforts to update his decoration hisfrry-prior 
to the CY96B board.  In addition, he could have written a letter 
to  the  CY96B  board  president  to  ensure  the  board  was 
knowledgeable  of  the  existence  of  the  award,  if  he  felt  the 
presence of the citation alone was not  sufficient for the board. 
However,  they  do  not  find  any  record  that  the  applicant wrote 
such a letter to the board president.  They, therefore, are not 
convinced  the  applicant  exhausted  all  efforts  to  ensure  his 
records were accurate prior to the promotion board.  By  his own 
admission, he was unaware it was missing until after the board. 
Since the citation was filed in the OSR on 11 December 1995, they 
strongly  recommend  denying  the  applicant’s  request  for  SSB 
consideration on this issue. 
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. - 

2 

97-03761 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

On  9 February  1998,a  complete  copy of  the Air  Force  evaluation 
was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 
days.  As  of  this  date,  no  response has  been  received by  this 
office. 

THE BOARD CO NCLUDES THAT: 
1.  The  applicant  has  exhausted  all  remedies  provided  by 
existing law or regulations. 

- 

2.  The application was timely filed. 

Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
3. 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice. 
Applicant  contends that the close out date of the contested MSM 
should be on or after 16 October 1995.  However, as noted by the 
Air  Force he  did  not  provide any evidence  to substantiate that 
the close out date on the MSM  is in error or unjust.  Applicant 
also appears to be requesting that his records, to include an OSB 
reflecting award of the MSM,  20LC, be considered for promotion to 
the grade  of  colonel by  SSB  for the  CY96  selection board.  We 
note that his OSB prepared for the CY96 board did not reflect the 
award; however, the  citation accompanying  the  award  was  in his 
selection folder.  The Air Force has indicated that the citation 
was  in evidence for review by  the promotion  board  and  factored 
into the  original promotion board  evaluation.  We  believe  that 
promotion  boards  evaluate  the  entire  officer  record,,and it  is 
highly unlikely the omission of the MSM  in question from his OSB 
was the cause of his nonselection.  In view of the above, we are 
compelled to conclude that the omission of  the award on his OSB 
was a harmless error.  Therefore, we find no basis upon which to 
recommend favorable action on this application. 

-- - 

- 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 
The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  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. 

3 

- 

97- 03761 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 10 September 1 9 9 8 ,   under the provisions of 
AFI 3 6 - 2 6 0 3 :  

Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair 
Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member 
MS. Rita J. Maldonado, Member 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A .   DD Form 1 4 9 ,   dated 1 2   Nov 97,  w/atchs. 
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 2 2   Jan 9 8 .  
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 9  Feb 9 8 .  

r 

' Panel Chair 

4 

DEPARTMENT Of  THE AIR  FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS AIR  FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER 

RANDOLPH AIR  FORCE  BASE TEXAS 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 
FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPP 

550 C Street West, Suite 8 
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-4710 

Requested Action.  Applicant requests special selection board (SSB) consideration by the 

CY96B (2 Dec 96) (P0696B) central colonel selection board with a corrected officer selection 
brief (OSB) reflecting award of the Meritorious Service Medal, 2"6 Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM, 
20LC) sometime &r  16 Oct 95. 

 

.

.

Basis for Request.  The applicant contends the date of the award for the MSM, ZOLC, 
was erroneous.  He also asserts he was unaware the contested award was not present on his OSB 
until he received his notification for the subsequent board. 

Recommendation.  Deny. 

Facts and Comments: 

a.  Application is timely.  AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted 
Evaluation Reports, do& not apply in this instance. Applicant has two nonselections for 
promotion to the grade of colonel by the CY95B (10 Oct 95) (P0695B) and P0696B boards. He 
was also considered by the CY97B (8 Dec 97) (P0697B) board; however, results of that board 
are not releasable at this time. 

b.  In support of his appeal, the applicant submits a copy of two pages of a records 

review rip. 

c.  The applicant contends the close out date for the MSM, 20LC should be some 
time after 16 Oct 95 instead of 22 Sep 95. Yet,  he did not include anything, such as an amended 
citation or special series order, to substantiate his contention.  We, therefore, conclude the 
closeout date of the award is accurate. 

d.  The applicant further contends the MSM, 20LC, was not reflected on his OSB 
for the P0696B central colonel selection board. We agree.  However, the citation was filed in bis 
OSR 1 I Dec 95 and was, therefore, in evidence for review by the promotion board and fhctored 
into the original promotion evaluation.  Although the applicant claims he was in constant 
communication With the MPF from the time he arrived on station in October 95, he failed to 

provide any documentation of his efforts dated prior to the promotion board held in Dec 96.  We 
note the copies of the two pages from the records review rip were extracted from Personnel 
Concepts I11 (PCIII) in December 97.  There is no documentation of the applicant's efforts to 
update his decoration history prior to the P0696B board.  In addition, he could have written a 
letter to the P0696B board president to ensure the board was knowledgeable of the existence of 
the award, if he felt the presence of the citation alone was not sufficient for the boqd.  However, 
we do not find any record the applicant wrote such a letter to the board president.  We, therefore, 
are not convinced he exhausted all efforts to ensure his records were accurate prior to the 
promotion board.  By his own admission, he was unaware it was missing until after the board. 
Since the citation was filed in the OSR 11 Dec 95, we strongly recommend denying the 
applicant's request for SSB consideration on this issue. 

Summary.  Based on the lack of evidence provided, our recommendation of denial 

is appropriate. 

Ch, Promotion, Evaluation &d  Recognition Div 
Director of Personnel Program Management