AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

@ W 4  1999 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER: 

98-00235 

COUNSEL:  None 

HEARING DESIRED:  No 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His  duty  history  entry,  dated  27 Aug  89,  be  corrected  to  read 
“Student  Education  with  Industry  (EWI) Contracting  Management” 
rather  than  ”Student  Contracting  Management”  and  promotion 
reconsideration by  the  Calendar  Year  1997C  (CY97C)  (21 Jul  97) 
Lieutenant Colonel Board. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

During  his  nonselection  briefing  on  20 Nov  97,  the  Promotions 
Branch indicated that his duty title was incorrectly entered into 
the Personnel Center’s computer.  The title for 27 Aug 89 omitted 
EWI  and  this  omission  led  to  the  belief  that  he  had  failed to 
complete  a  degree  program.  EWI  is  n o t   a  degree  program.  The 
Promotions  Branch  believed  this  could  have  led  the  promotion 
board to the same conclusion and been a significant factor in his 
nonselection.  The  error  was  obvious  enough  that  the  Military 
Personnel Flight  (MPF) has already submitted a correction to the 
system. 

Applicant‘s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

The  applicant’s  Total  Active  Federal  Military  Service  Date 
(TAFMSD) was 22 Jul 81. 

Applicant’s  Officer  Performance Report  (OPR) profile  since  1988 
follows : 

AFBCMR 98-00235 

PERIOD ENDING 

OVERALL EVALUATION 

2 0   Aug 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
2 8   Jun 
6 Jun 
2 8   Jun 

8 8  
8 9  
90 
9 1  
92 
9 3  
94 
9 5  
96 
97 
97 

Education/Training Report  (TR) 

Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 

Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 
Meets Standards 

TR 

Meets Standards 

The  applicant was  considered and  not  selected  for promotion  to 
the grade of  lieutenant colonel by  the CY97C  Lieutenant Colonel 
Board that convened on 2 1   Jul 9 7 .  
The Officer Selection Brief  (OSB) prepared on 3 0   Jul  97  for the 
CY97C  Lieutenant Colonel Board reflects his duty title for 27  Aug 
8 9   as "Student Contracting Management." 
On 2 5   Nov  9 7 ,   a correction was updated by the MPF to reflect the 
applicant's  duty title as "Student EWI/Contracting Management." 
On  1 Sep  9 8 ,   the  applicant  retired  under  the  Early  Retirement 
Program in the grade of major.  He was credited with-  1 7   years, 1 
month and 9  days of active service. 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The  Chief,  Appeals  &  SSB  Branch,  AFPC/DPPPA,  reviewed  this 
application and indicated, in part,  that it is obvious that the 
errors  claimed  were  discoverable at  the  time  they  occurred and 
the  applicant  has  provided  nothing  to  convince  them  that  the 
errors were  not  discoverable until Nov  97  nor  has  he  offered a 
concrete explanation for filing late.  While DPPPA would normally 
recommend the application be  denied as untimely, they are aware 
that the AFBCMR has determined it must adhere to the decision in 
the case of Detweiler vs.  Pena  which prevents application of the 
statute's  time bar if the applicant has filed within three years 
of separation or retirement. 

While  the  appropriate  changes were  made  to  the  2 9   Aug  8 9   duty 
history  entry,  DPPPA does  not  support promotion  reconsideration 
on this issue as this information was  included on his  2 8   Jun 90 
TR  which  is  filed  in  his  officer  selection  record  (OSR).  As 
such, the board was aware of the correct duty title by virtue of 
the fact that it was annotated on the 2 8   Jun 90  TR even though it 
was incorrect on the OSB.  Further, DPPPA noted that at the time 
the  TR  was  rendered,  the  applicant  was  a  captain. 
He  was 

2 

AFBCMR 98-00235 

DPPPA 
considered  and  selected  by  the  CY92C  Major  Board. 
retrieved the OSB reviewed by  the CY92C board and noted that the 
same incorrect information was also on his OSB.  In addition, the 
28 Jun  90  TR  was  the  third  document  from  the  top  in  the 
applicant‘s OSR at the time of the CY92C board.  DPPPA believes 
that  if  this  incorrect  duty  title  were  going  to  have  a 
detrimental effect  on  the  applicant’s promotion  opportunity, it 
would  have  happened at  the  CY92C board.  The  applicant has  had 
four  opportunities  (once  to  major  and  three  to  lieutenant 
colonel)  to  take  action  to  correct  the  erroneous  duty  title. 
DPPPA  strongly  recommends  this  appeal  be  time-barred  from 
consideration.  However, if the Board considers, then this appeal 
should be denied due to lack of merit. 

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is 
attached at Exhibit C. 

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant reviewed the Air  Force evaluation and provided a two- 
page rebuttal statement  (see 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 probable error or injustice.  After 
a  thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record  and  applicant’s 
submission,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  his  duty  history  entry 
should be  corrected  and  he  be  given  promotion  reconsideration. 
His contentions are duly noted; however, while we  note that his 
duty  title  was  incorrectly  entered  into  the  Personnel  Center’s 
computer,  the  CY97C  board  was  aware  of  the  correct  duty  title 
since  it  was  annotated  on  the  28 Jun  90 TR  even  though  it  was 
incorrect on his OSB.  We therefore believe that this constitutes 
nothing  more  than  a  harmless  error. 
Applicant  has  not 
substantiated that the reason for his nonselection for promotion 
by  the CY97C board was because of the incorrect duty title.  In 
view  of  the  foregoing  and  absence  substantial  evidence  he  has 
suffered either an error or an injustice, we  find no compelling 
basis to recommend granting the relief sought. 

3 

AFBCMR 98-0023 5 

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. 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 22 October 1998, under the provisions of Air 
Force Instruction 36-2603: 

~ 

~~ 

~~~~~~~~ 

Ms. Martha Maust, Panel Chair 
Mr. Kenneth L. Reinertson, Member 
Mr. William E .   Edwards, Member 
Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner  (without vote) 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 98, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 5 Feb 98, w/atchs. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 16 Feb 98. 
Exhibit E.  Letter fr applicant, dated 24 Apr 98. 

MARTHA MAUST' 
Panel Chair 

4