RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02034
            INDEX CODE: 131.01

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED: No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  by
Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)  for  the  Calendar  Year   1997C   (CY97C)
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Aerial Achievement Medal,  First  Oak  Leaf  Cluster,  (AAM,  1OLC)  was
awarded by Special Order SOG-037 on 25 June  1997,  too  late  to  have  the
award included in his records  for  the  CY97C  Lieutenant  Colonel  Central
Selection board.  He learned of the award when it was presented on  25  June
1997.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy  of  Special  Order  SOG-
037, dated 12 June 1997.

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
major.

Applicant was considered and not selected for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by the CY97C and CY98B Selection Boards.

Applicant was awarded the AAM, 1OLC, for the period 20 December 1995  to  20
December 1995 by Special Order SOG-037, dated 12 June 1997.  The AAM,  1OLC,
was not required, by regulation, to be in his records at  the  time  of  the
CY97C board.

OPR profile since 1994, follows:

           PERIOD ENDING           EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

                       02 Aug 94             Meets Standards
                       06 Oct 95             Meets Standards
                       31 Aug 96             Meets Standards
                 #     01 May 97             Meets Standards
                 ##    03 Mar 98             Meets Standards

# Top report at time of CY97C board.
## Top report at time of CY98B board.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Acting  Chief,  Appeals  and  SSB  Branch,  AFPC/DPPPA,  reviewed  this
application and states that the applicant believes  he  was  considered  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY97C board without  the
citation for the AAM, 1OLC, in his officer selection record (OSR).  They  do
not agree.  The citation for the decoration was  filed  in  his  OSR  20 May
1997, two months prior to the CY97C board.  More  importantly,  the  central
selection board record identification  number  is  annotated  in  the  upper
right hand corner of the citation,  indicating  it  was  considered  by  the
CY97C board.  Although  the  decoration  was  not  reflected  on  the  CY97C
officer selection brief (OSB), the citation was filed  in  his  OSR.   As  a
matter of fact, they note the citation was  filed  in  the  applicant’s  OSR
prior to the special order being published which explains  why  it  was  not
included on the OSB.  Since the board was  aware  the  AAM,  1OLC,  existed,
they are convinced they factored it into their promotion assessment  of  the
applicant.   They,  therefore,  would  be  opposed  to  his  receiving   SSB
consideration  on  this  issue.   Based  on  the  evidence  provided,   they
recommend denial of applicant's request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed  the  Air  Force  evaluation  and  states  the  award
AFPC/DPPPA refers to was Special Order G-696, 7  May  1997.   The  award  in
question is Special Order SOG-037, 12 June 1997 which was  not  in  his  OSR
for promotion consideration.  Some confusion  exists  in  that  both  medals
were awarded as the First Oak Leaf Cluster.  Special order G-696  was  later
amended to read “Second Oak Leaf Cluster.”  To reiterate his  DD  Form  149,
SOG-037 was not in his OSR for the CY97C board.  This was  in  part  due  to
the proximity of the issue date of the award (12 June 1997) to
the convening of the CY97C (21 July 1997) promotion board, and also  because
he received (was made aware of) the award too late to ensure it  was  placed
in  his  OSR.   This  award  is  significant   because   it   reflects   the
unprecedented operational use of unique  systems  on  the  MH-53J  PAVE  LOW
Helicopter in a hostile environment and hazardous weather  conditions  on  a
mission of national strategic importance.   This  crucial  flight  delivered
Admiral Leighton-Smith, Lt  Gen  Ryan,  and  their  NATO  counterparts  into
Sarajevo for implementation  of  the  Dayton  Peace  Accords  Transition  of
Authority Ceremony - after other agencies  had  failed  to  accomplish  this
“must do” mission.

Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Acting  Chief,  Appeals  and  SSB  Branch,  AFPC/DPPPA,  reviewed  this
application and states  that  apparently  the  citation  for  the  contested
decoration contained an error.   It  read  “1st  Oak  Leaf  Cluster  (1OLC)”
instead of “2nd Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC).”  The  applicant  included  only  a
copy of Special Order SOG-037, dated 12 June 1997, that indicated the  award
of the AAM, 1OLC, with his initial appeal.  He did not mention an error  had
occurred when the special order for his AAM,  2OLC,  was  published.   As  a
result, they concluded the AAM, 1OLC, had been filed in the applicant’s  OSR
and, therefore, was present for the CY97C board’s review.   They  now  agree
with the applicant and do not  believe  the  CY97C  central  board  had  the
opportunity to review the AAM, 2OLC, citation;  however,  the  citation  was
not required to be filed until after the board convened  on  21  June  1997.
They note the order was not prepared until 12 June 1994.  AFI  36-2803,  The
Air Force Awards and Decorations Program, 15  August  1997,  paragraph  3.1,
states,  decoration  recommendations  are  entered  into  official  channels
within 2 years and awarded within  3  years  of  the  act,  achievement,  or
service performed.  In addition,  decoration  citations  must  be  forwarded
within 60 days of the date of the special  order.   In  this  instance,  the
special order and citation were  processed  within  the  guidelines  of  the
governing  directive  and  the  citation  should  have  been  filed  in  the
applicant’s OSR no later than 11 August 1997, some  three  weeks  after  the
board convened.  They, therefore, would be opposed to  the  Board  directing
the applicant receive  SSB  consideration  by  the  CY97C  board  since  the
decoration was not required to be filed in his OSR  until  after  the  board
convened.  The applicant contends he was made aware of the  AAM,  2OLC,  too
late to ensure the citation was appropriately  filed  in  his  OSR  for  the
CY97C board’s review.  They do not agree.  The applicant  could  have  faxed
copies of the citation and special order to HQ AFPC/DPPBR1 for inclusion  in
his
OSR.  Furthermore, he could  have  written  a  letter  to  the  CY97C  board
president to ensure the board was aware of the accomplishments noted in  the
decoration.  They find no evidence he wrote such a letter.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and  states  his  basis  for
appeal is the absence of an AAM from his  OSR  during  the  CY97C  promotion
board.  Initially, the AFPC Review  Board  incorrectly  concluded  that  the
specified award was in his OSR for the  promotion  board.   After  a  second
review, they agreed that the award was missing from his  records.   However,
they now say this was not an error, reference AFI 36-2803, Table  3.1,  note
4; and instruct that he should have faxed the award to  the  board  when  he
received it on 25 June (five days after  the  board  convened).   Then  they
state that he should have written a letter to  the  board  president  making
the board aware of this accomplishment.  Prior to the board, his  supervisor
counseled him that letters to  the  board  president  were  perceived  in  a
negative manner, and that he should  not  write  to  the  board.   The  AFPC
rationalizations do not justify denying him a fair chance at promotion.   He
does not believe the responses from AFPC/DPPA reflect  the  core  values  of
the Air Force.   Incorrect  and  legalistic  answers,  combined  with  20/20
hindsight counseling are not valid reasons to deny his appeal.

Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The  Acting  Chief,  Appeals  and  SSB  Branch,  AFPC/DPPPA,  reviewed  this
application and states that while they acknowledge  the  contested  citation
was missing from the applicant’s OSR, it was not required to be filed  until
11 August 1997, some three weeks after the board convened on  21  July  1997
(their previous advisory erroneously cited 21 June 1997).   That  means  the
applicant had almost an entire month prior to  his  promotion  consideration
to fax a copy of the order and citation to HQ AFPC/DPPBR1 for  inclusion  in
his OSR.  Although the contested citation was missing from  his  record,  it
was not required to be there until August - therefore, his  record  was  not
erroneous when it met the board.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states there  have  been
a lot of confusion regarding the facts  in  this  case.   However,  HQ  AFPC
finally agrees that the contested citation and order was not in his  records
as he  originally  claimed.   After  reviewing  the  HQ  AFPC  response  and
researching his documents, he determined that the date,  25  June  1997,  he
claimed to have received the award was erroneous.  He received the award  on
24 July 1997, too late to fax the order and citation  to  the  board,  which
had  already  convened.   This  was  his  original  and  current  point   of
contention.  He does not contest whether or not  HQ  AFPC  was  required  to
have filed the citation before the board met.  His  request  remains  simply
to have his accurate and complete officer selection record reviewed  by  the
promotion board.

In support of his appeal, applicant submits a  statement  from  HQ  AFSOC/IG
stating the applicant was presented the AAM on 24 July 1997 and to the  best
of their knowledge, this was the first time the  applicant  was  made  aware
that he would receive an award for his actions.

Applicant's complete response, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

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 a probable error or an injustice  warranting  favorable  action
on the applicant’s request for reconsideration for promotion  to  the  grade
of lieutenant colonel by an SSB.  Applicant originally  contended  that  the
Aerial Achievement Medal, First Oak Leaf  Cluster  (AAM,  1OLC)  awarded  on
June 25, 1997, was received too late to  have  the  award  included  in  his
records for the CY97C Lieutenant Colonel  Central  Selection  Board.   After
further reflection, however, the applicant provides  corroborative  evidence
that the AAM, 1OLC, was awarded to him on July 24, 1997, and argues that  it
was too late to fax the order and  citation  to  the  selection  board.   We
disagree. First, as noted by the Air Force,  decoration  citations  must  be
forwarded within 60 days of the date of  the  special  order  in  accordance
with AFI 36-2803 (The Air Force Awards and Decorations Program), August  15,
1994, Table 3.1, note 4).  [NOTE: There is a
typographical  error  in  the  HQ  AFPC/DPPA  advisory  which  reflects  the
effective date of the applicable AFI as  August  15,  1997,  as  opposed  to
August 15, 1994.]  Since the special order awarding the AAM, 1OLC,  was  not
published until May 7, 1997, the award could be  filed  in  the  applicant’s
records in early August 1997 without violating the  applicable  AFI.   Since
this date  was  well  after  the  adjournment  of  the  selection  board  in
question, there was no requirement for the  decoration  to  be  before  that
board.  Secondly, if the applicant believed that the  additional  decoration
was crucial to his chance of selection for promotion, he had until the  date
the selection board adjourned to fax the award to AFPC for filing  into  his
selection folder. As  an  aside,  even  assuming  arguendo  that  decoration
should have  been  a  matter  of  record  for  consideration  by  the  CY97C
selection board, since the AAM, 2OLC, was on file in  his  records,  it  was
obvious to the selection board  members  that  he  had  received  the  1OLC.
Thus, in our view, whether or not the decoration was a matter of  record  is
for all practical purposes irrelevant and should not serve  as  a  basis  to
authorize reconsideration for promotion by an SSB.

_________________________________________________________________

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 8 April 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
      Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
      Ms. Gloria J. Williams, Examiner (without vote)

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 97, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 12 Aug 98, w/atch.
      Exhibit D. Applicant’s Response, dated 8 Sept 98, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 10 Nov 98.
      Exhibit F. Applicant’s Response, dated 7 Dec 98.
      Exhibit G. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 3 Feb 99.
      Exhibit H. Letters, AFBCMR, dated 31 Aug 98, 23 Nov 98 and
                       15 Feb 98.
      Exhibit I. Applicant’s Response, dated 15 Feb 99, w/atch.





                             BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                             Panel Chair