RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECO  El 2 4 1999 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NO:  98-01765 
COUNSEL:  NONE 

HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

Applicant  requests 
that  he  be  considered  for promotion  to  the 
grade of colonel by 
a Special Selection Board  (SSB) for the CY97B 
Central  Colonel  Selection  Board,  with  a 
(8  December  1997) 
corrected Officer Selection Brief  (OSB).  Applicant's submission 
is at Exhibit A. 

The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request 
and  provided  advisory  opinions  to  the  Board  recommending  the 
application be  denied  (Exhibit C) ,  The advisory opinions were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response  (Exhibit D). 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 
After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the 
available evidence of  record, we  find  insufficient evidence of 
error or injustice to warrant corrective action,  The facts and 
opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be  based  on 
the evidence of  record and have not been rebutted by applicant. 
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which 
entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not  followed,  or 
appropriate  standards  were  not  applied,  we  find  no  basis  to 
disturb the existing record, 
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will only be  reconsidered upon the presentation of  new relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 
Members  of  the  Board  Mr.  Michael  P.  Higgins,  Mr.  William E. 
Edwards, and Mr, Patrick R. Wheeler considered this application 
on 1 December 1998 in accordance with the provisions of Air Force 
Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552. 

\ - 

Panel Chair 

V 

Exhibits : 
A.  Applicant ' s  DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinions 
D ,   SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM: HQ AFPCLDPAPPS 

550 C Street West, Suite 32 
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-4734 

SUBJECT: 

ilitary Records @D Form 149) 

1.  Requested Action: 
followed by SSB consideration. 

his joint duty info corrected on his OSB 

2.  Basis for Request: 
(DNA), Kirtland AFB, should have resulted in joint duty credit. 

laims his assignment at the Defense Nuclear Agency 

3.  Background:  Period of service in question was fiom 20 Nov 92 to 17 Jan 97 when 
-was 
organization considered joint support and is only authorized (JCS Administration Pub 
1.2,30 Jun 89)  to have up to 50 percent of its 0-4 and above positions as actual joint 
duty assignments. 

assigned to DNA which is, in fact, a joint agency.  However,  DNA is an 

4.  Facts:  Altho 
selection folder 
DNA requisition  along with the assignment worksheet is attached. 

assigned to DNA, a review of his assignment 
was reassigned to a non-joint position.  A copy of the 

5.  Recommendation:  Disapprove request. 

/-l 

Attachments : 
AFMPC Fm 214 and DNA Fm 363 

Cdef, Joint Ofcr Mgt 

D E P A R T M E N T  OF THE AIR  FORCE 

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

R A N D O L P H  AIR  FORCE B A S E  T E X A S  

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCDPAISl 

550 C Street West, Suite 32 
Randolph AFB, TX 78150-4734 

SUBJECT:  Application for Correction of Military Records (DD Form 149) 

Requested Action.  The applicant is requesting correction to his Officer Selection Brief 
(OSB) in the areas of Acquisition Corps, Joint Duty History and Decorations.  He also requests 
special selection board consideration.  We will be addressing the Acquisition Corps area of the 
OSB only. 

Basis for Request.  The applicant believes his OSB should have reflected “YES” under 

the Acquisition Corps area due to his meeting the Level I1 certification in Program Management. 

Background.  AFPEO/CM (now SAF/AQXD) made the decision that the only acquisition 
information to be displayed on the OSB would be if the individual was a corps member; thus, the 
reflection of “YES” in this category.  This meets the requirements of the law to identify the 
promotion group.  To have the reflection of “YES” appear on an individuals OSB, an individual 
must meet all 5 basic qualifications and be updated into the corps.  The 5 basic qualifications for 
corps membership are: 

a.  Completion of the baccalaureate degree. 

b.  Completion of 24 semester credit hours in business disciplines or 24 semester credit 

hours in the person’s acquisition career field and 12 semester credit hours in business disciplines. 
(2411 2) 

c.  Four years of acquisition experience. 

d.  Level I1 certification. 

e.  Performance that “meets” standards. 

An individual becomes an Acquisition Corps member when he or she meets the above criteria. 
Membership is on a fully qualified basis and is determined through an evaluation of the 
individual’s qualifications. 

I 

Facts.  The applicant does not meet the basic criteria for award of the “YES” under the 

Acquisition Corps area of the OSB.  In Dec 97, he met the criteria for the baccalaureate degree, 
performance standards, and with the backdated letter he provided, his level I1 certification. 
However, the applicant did not hlfill the requirement of having his 24/12 awardedupdated into 
the Personnel Data System, nor did he complete his 48th month of coded experience until the end 
of Dec 97 (credit for a month is not awarded until that month is completed). This applicants 4 7  
month was awarded 1 Jan 98. 

laws established in DODI 5000.55.  a a  

Recommendation.  Denial, as pertains to the Acquisition area.  Any decision to grant relief 
under the Acquisition Corps area and award applicant the “YES” on the OSB will be against the 

SE  , TSgt, USAF 

Chkf, Reports and Queries Team 
Directorate of Assignments 

f 

D E P A R T M E N T  O F  T H E  A I R   FORCE 

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

R A N D O L P H   AIR  FORCE  B A S E  TEXAS 

MEMORANDUM FOR  AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPCDPPPAB 

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

Requested Action.  The applicant requests special selection board (SSB) consideration by 

the CY97B (8 Dec 97) (P0697B) central colonel selection board with a corrected officer 
selection brief (OSB). 

Basis for Request.  The applicant believes his OSB should have reflected Acquisition Corps 

Certification; his Joint Duty History did not reflect assignment to the Field Command Defense 
NucleadSpecial Weapons Agency from 20 Nov 92 to 16 Jan 97; the Joint Duty History box 
should have been annotated “other JDA” to reflect assignment to Defense Agency Joint Activity; 
his Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) was not listed in precedence order on the 
P0697B OSB; and Squadron Officer School (SOS) does not reflect Distinguished Graduate 
(DG). 

’ 

Recommendation.  Deny. 

Facts and Comments: 

a.  The application is timely.  An application under AFI 36-240 1, Correcting Officer 

and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, would not be appropriate as the issues raised in this appeal 
are not within the purview of that directive.  This advisory will address the decoration, SOS 
DG and SSB issues only. 

b.  AFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective Continuation, 1 Mar 96, is the 

governing directive. 

c.  The applicant included a copy of a  19 May 98 memorandum from SMC/AXR; 
copies of five officer performance reports (OPRs); a copy of his P0697B officer preselection 
brief (OPB); a copy of his promotion recommendation form (PRF); and a copy of his P0697B 
OSB. 

d.  The applicant contends his DMSM is listed in lower precedence order than the 

Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) on his OSB.  DoD 1348.33-M, Manual of Military 
Decorations and Awards, dictates the precedence of decorations and the sequence they should 
be worn on the uniform.  However, the Personnel Data System (PDS) does not recognize this 

.

r

-

 

order of precedence.  Instead, the PDS groups similar decorations when OSBs are prepared 
for file in a member’s record.  Similarly, decoration citations are filed in the selection record 
in the order they are received and not in any particular precedence.  Since the DMSM was 
listed on his OSB and filed in his OSR, we are confident the board members were aware of 
the decoration.  We also conducted a random sampling of OSBs from the P0697B board and 
discovered in most cases, the MSM is listed before the DMSM.  In addition, we also checked 
the benchmark records and found the MSM was listed first in every instance where the 
member had a DMSM.  As such, there is no merit to this portion of the appeal, since his 
decoration listing was no different than any other officer who had both a DMSM and an 
MSM. 

e.  The applicant’s contention the SOS entry on his OSB should reflect 

“Distinguished Graduate” (DG) is unfounded.  There is no provision requiring “DG” 
annotations for graduates of SOS to be reflected on the OSB.  Rather, it is documented on AF 
Form 475, EducatiodTraining Report or the corresponding OPR at the discretion of the 
evaluators.  We are including copies of the applicant’s AF Form 475, and 24 May 82 OPR. 
As you can see, both reports contain statements verifLing his status as DG at SOS.  Central 
boards evaluate the entire officer selection record (OSR) (including the PRF, OPRs, officer 
effectiveness reports, training reports, letters of evaluation, decorations, and the OSB), 
assessing whole person factors such as job performance, professional qualities, depth and 
breadth of experience, leadership, and academic and professional military education.  The 
selection board had his entire officer selection record that clearly outlines his 
accomplishments since the date he came on active duty.  Therefore, we are strongly opposed 
to the applicant receiving SSB consideration on this issue. since both the AF Form 475 and 
the 24 May 92 OPR were filed in his OSR. 

f.  If the Board determines relief is warranted on any of the issues raised in this 

appeal (and we don’t think they should), we would not be opposed to the applicant receiving 
SSB consideration by the P0697B central colonel selection board. 

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

KENNETH W. FRYMAN, Col, USAF 
Ch, Promotion, Evaluation and Recognition Div 
Directorate of Personnel Program Management 

Attachments : 
1.  AF Form 475,  EducatiodTraining Report 
2.  24 May 82 OPR 

cc: