AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  98-01173 

COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APR  0 9  ?%IC! 

APPLICANT REUUESTS THAT: 

1.  The  award  of  the  Meritorious  Service  Medal  (MSM), for  the 
period  30 June  1993  to  15 September 1995, be  reflected  on  the 
Officer Selection Brief  (OSB) and the citation be placed  in his 
Officer Selection Record  (OSR) . 
2.  He  be  considered  for promotion  to  the  grade  of  colonel  by 
special selection board  (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1997B  (CY97B) 
Central Colonel Selection Board. 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

The  personal  data  form  to  correct  his  current  address, office 
symbol, Air  Force Specialty Codes  (AFSCs) and MSM  award  in his 
official  records  was  submitted  in  October 
Subsequent 
annual  reviews  indicated  that  his  records  were  corrected--with 
corrections of  all  the errors.  However, he  did not  notice  the 
omission of the MSM correction. 
In support of his appeal, applicant submits a copy of the orders 
and  citation for the  award  of  the  MSM,  for the period  30 June 
and copies of the Report of Individual 
-to 
15 September 
Personnel  (RIP) date 
er -, 
Applicant's submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

August -and 

April 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

Applicant  is  currently  serving on  extended  active  duty  in  the 
grade of lieutenant colonel. 

Applicant w 
the  CY97B 
selected. 

ed for promotion to the grade of colonel by 
Central  Colonel  Promotion  Board  but  not 

t 

Applicant's  Officer  Performance  Report  (OPR)  profile,  since 
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel, is as follows: 

PERIOD ENDING 

OVERALL PERFORMANCE 

10 Feb 93 
10 Feb 94 
4 Aug 94 
4 Aug 95 
4 Aug 96 
23 Apr 97 
23 Apr 98 

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

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
The  Chief,  Promotion,  Evaluation  &  Recognition  Division,  HQ 
AFPC/DPPP, states that  the officer pre-selection brief  (OPB) is 
sent to each eligible officer several months prior to a selection 
board.  The OPB contains data that will appear on the OSB  at the 
central  board. 
Written  instructions  attached  to  the  OPB 
specifically instruct the officer to carefully examine the brief 
for completeness and accuracy.  If any errors are found, he/she 
must  t a k e   corrective  action prior  to  the  selection board, not 
after  it. 
In  the  applicant's case, he  was  first  considered 
below-the-promotion zone  (BPZ) for promotion to  colonel by  the 
CY95B  (10 Oct 95) board.  Since the award of the MSM occurred one 
month  prior,  it  would  not  have  been  reflected  on  the  OPB  he 
received for the CY95B board.  However, when he received "OPB 
cond BPZ consideration by the CT96B  ( 2   Dec 9,,6) colonel 
should have made note of  its absence at that time and 
ective action to have the MSM  filed in 31, record and 
licant has 
personnel 
exercised  "reasonable 

have the personnel date system  (PDS) updated. 

numerous  opportunities  to  review The* 

has  not  demonstrated 
ensuring his entire recor  was correct. 

The Personnel Data System  (PDS) has now been updated to reflect 
the  MSM  and  a  copy  of  the  citation  is  now  filed  in  the 
applicant's OSR.  They recommend- 
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C 

request be denied. 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

Applicant  submitted a  response  to  the Air  Force  evaluation and 
states, in part, that 
versight does not mean that he did not 
officer  pre-selection  brief  for 
carefully  examine 
completeness and acc 
--failure 
to catch, again, in the 
OPB  for 1 second  BPZ  consideration  colonels  board,  of  a 

2 

- 

correction that he made 11 months prior was an oversight--not an 
act of exercising less than reasonable diligence. 

A  copy  of  the  applicant's complete  response  is  attached  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 probable error or injustice.  After 
a  thorough  review  of  the  evidence  of  record  and  applicant's 
submission,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  the  award  of  the 
Meritorious Service Medal  (MSM), for the period  30 June 1993 to 
Officer Selection 
15 September 1995, should be  reflected on 
Brief  (OSB) and the citation be placed  in 
Officer Selection 
Record  (OSR) and, that he should be considered for promotion to 
the  grade  of  colonel by  special  selection board  (SSB) for the 
Calendar Year 1997B (CY97B) Central Colonel Selection Board. 
contentions  are  duly  noted;  however,  we  do  not  find  these 
assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,  sufficiently  persuasive  to 
override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  As stated by 
HQ AFPC/DPPP, since the award of the MSM occurred one month prior 
to the CY95B below-the-zone  (BPZ) promotion board, it would not 
have been reflected on the Officer Pre-selection Brief  (OPB) the 
applicant received.  However, he should have noted the absence of 
the MSM  for the CY96B BPZ consideration and also for the CY97B 
in-the-promotion zone  (IPZ) and taken corrective action to have 
the MSM  filed in 
record.  It appears that the applicant has 
been  provided  opportunities  to  review  the  personnel  data  and 
ensure  that  his  record  was  correct  prior  to  promotion  board 
consideration.  We  therefore agree with  the  recommendations of 
the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for 
our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden 
that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, 
we  find  no  compelling  basis  to  recommend  granting  the  relief 
sought. 

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 

3 

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  15 December  1998, under  the  provisions  of 
AFI 36-2603. 

Ms. Martha Maust, Panel Chair 
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman 111, Member 
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27  Apr 98, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B .   Applicant's Officer Selection Record. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPP, dated 13 May 98. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 May 98. 
Exhibit E.  Applicant's Letter, dated 4 Jun 98 

MXkTHA MAUST' 
Panel Chair 

4 

D E P A R T M E N T  O F  THE A I R   F O R C E  

H E A D Q U A R T E R S   AIR  F O R C E   P E R S O N N E L  C E N T E R  

R A N D O L P H  AIR  F O R C E   E A S E  T E X A S  

13 MAY 98 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPC/DPPP 

550 C Street West, Suite 8 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 10 

SUBJECT: 

Requested Action.  The applicant requests reconsideration by the CY97B (8 Dec 97) 

Colonel Board (P0697B) to include the award of the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) reflected 
on his officer selection brief (OSB) and the citation in his officer selection record (OSR). 

Basis for Request.  The MSM was awarded in Sep 95, and since that time, the applicant has 

had several records review reports of individual personnel (RIPs) accomplished. He has made 
other corrections to the data on the RIPs, but had never noticed the absence of the MSM. 

Recommendation.  Deny. 

Facts and Comments. 

a.  Application is timely filed.  A similar application was not submitted under the 

provisions of AFI 36-240 1, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, as it would not 
have been appropriate. 

b.  The governing directive is AFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective 

Continuation, 1 Mar 96. 

- 

c.  The appIicant has one nonselection by the P0697B board. 

d.  In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of four RIPs-Oct 95 (with, 

corrections), Aug 96 (with corrections except the MSM), Apr 98 (with corrections except the 
MSM), and another copy of the Apr 98 RIP with all corrections made.  He states he never 
noticed the omission of the MSM when he made other corrections to his records. 

e.  The officer preselection brief (OPB) is sent to each eligible officer several months 

prior to a selection board.  The OPB contains data that will appear on the OSB at the central 
board.  Written instructions attached to the OPB and given to the officer before the central 
selection board specifically instruct himher to carefully examine the brief for completeness and 
accuracy.  If any errors are found, he/she must take corrective action prior to the selection boatd, 
not after it.  The instructions specifically state, “Officers will not be considered by a Special 

. .  

Selection Board if, in exercising reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the 
error or omission in hisher records and could have taken timely corrective action” (emphasis 
added).  In the applicant’s case, he was first considered below-the-promotion zone (BPZ) for 
promotion to colonel by the CY95B (10 Oct 95) board (P0695B).  Since the award of the MSM 
occurred one month prior, it would not have been reflected on the OPB he received for the 
P0695B board.  However, when he received his OPB for his second BPZ consideration by the 
CY96B (2 Dec 96) colonel board (P0696B), he should have made note of its absence at that time 
and taken corrective action to have the MSM filed in his record and have the personnel data 
system (PDS) updated.  The applicant has been provided numerous opportunities to review his 
personnel data; i.e., the RIPS discussed above and three OPBs.  Yet, he has not demonstrated he 
exercised “reasonable diligence” in ensuring his entire record was correct. 

f.  As a matter of note, the PDS has now been updated to reflect the MSM, and a copy 

of the citation is now filed in the applicant’s officer selection record. 

Summary.  Based on the evidence provided, we recommend denial. 

KENNETH W. FRYMAN, Colonel, USAF 
Ch, Promotion, Evaluation & Recognition Div 
Directorate of Pers Program Mgt