RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-02846
                 INDEX CODE:  131

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be re-evaluated and he be considered for promotion to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Review Boards  (SRB),  for  the
Fiscal Years 1983 (FY83) and FY84 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He requested his point history be corrected  prior  to  the  convening
date of the selection boards in question.  However, the  participation
history was incorrect on the Officer Selection Briefs (OSBs) for  both
the FY83 and FY84 promotion boards.   The  Retirement/Retention  (R/R)
year closing out 29 November 1981 reflected a bad  year  in  which  he
earned only 45 points.  Applicant believes  the  “bad”  year  was  the
contributing factor that prevented him from being promoted.

In support of his  request,  applicant  submits  statements  from  two
retired General Officers, copies  of  his  point  credit  summary  and
copies of several Officer Effectiveness Reports (OERs).

Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate Air Force  office  of  primary  responsibility  (OPR).
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record  of
Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Director of Personnel Program Management, HQ ARPC/DP, states  that
applicant’s point history was corrected 31 January 1984;  however,  he
had already been a nonselect for promotion to the grade of  lieutenant
colonel for the second time.  He was discharged on 2 January 1984.

An AF Form 526, ANG/USAFR  Point  Credit  Summary,  was  sent  to  the
applicant on 31 January 1982 and on 31 January 1983.   On  both  forms
the retention/retirement year (R/R) ending 29 November 1981 showed  an
unsatisfactory year of participation.  According to the  point  credit
branch records, applicant had a history of submitting  points  two  or
three years after the fact.  It was  necessary  to  adjust  his  point
history for R/R years 1972 through 1976 and for R/R years  1978,  1980
and 1981.  The adjustment to the applicant’s point history in 1984 was
the result of the close-out  audit  performed  after  the  applicant’s
discharge on 28 December 1983.  It is the member’s  responsibility  to
provide timely information and to ensure his record is correct at  the
time it is reviewed  by  the  selection  board.   They  recommend  the
applicant’s request be denied.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant was  forwarded  a  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  on
28 December 1998 for  review  and  response.   Applicant  submitted  a
rebuttal and states, in part, that his commitment  and  accomplishment
in  his  profession  and  as  an  Air  Force  officer  is  in   direct
contradiction  to  the  assumption   that   he   would   neglect   his
responsibilities.  He also states that during the time he should  have
received the AF Forms 526,  his  mailing  address  had  been  changed.
Also, the very fact that the bad year was not  corrected  until  after
his  separation  is  affirmation  that  the  error  should  have  been
corrected prior to his consideration for promotion.

A copy of the applicant’s response, with attachments, 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 not  timely  filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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 records  should  be  reevaluated  and  that  he  be
reconsidered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel  by  the
Fiscal Year 1983 (FY83) and FY84 Lieutenant Colonel Selection  Boards.
His 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.  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.

4.  The documentation provided with this case was sufficient  to  give
the Board a clear understanding of the issues involved and a  personal
appearance, with or without counsel, would not have  materially  added
to that understanding.  Therefore, the request for a  hearing  is  not
favorably considered.

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

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 6 July 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603.

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
                  Mr. Gary Appleton, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Sep 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Microfiche Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DP, dated 8 Dec 98.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 Dec 98.
   Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 31 Mar 99, w/atchs.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair