RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00391
            INDEX CODE:  131.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

      HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration  for  promotion
to the grade of lieutenant colonel for the Calendar Year 1998B (CY98B)
Central Lieutenant Colonel  Selection  Board  with  inclusion  of  the
citation for the Meritorious Service Medal, 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster  (MSM
2OLC) in his  officer  selection  record  (OSR)  and  updated  in  the
personnel data system (PDS).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he departed his previous assignment at Los Angeles AFB in  August
1997, a decoration rip was ordered for his MSM on 8 August 1997.   The
letter by Col L--- explains that a classified award was written before
he left the assignment and then placed in a  classified  hold  folder.
This award sat in the folder for a number of months unsubmitted  until
he called to inquire about it.  It was after he asked about the  award
that they started working on it again.  Because  his  previous  office
failed to submit this award in a timely manner,  it  was  not  in  his
records when the CY98B Lieutenant Colonel promotion  board  met  on  1
June 1998.

During a record review with the Air Force  Personnel  Center,  he  was
told that because this award was not in his records when the promotion
board  met,  the  board  members  could  have  thought  his   previous
supervisors decided not to submit an  award  on  him  because  of  bad
performance.  The fact is that his performance  was  deserving  of  an
award, but his previous supervisor failed to submit this  award  in  a
timely manner and his previous chain of  command  failed  to  properly
follow-up to make sure it was submitted.  These oversights by his past
supervisors caused the award to not be in  his  promotion  record  and
this may have  contributed  to  his  non-selection  for  promotion  to
lieutenant colonel.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of  the  decoration
rip dated 8 August 1997, a character reference, a copy of the MSM,  to
include the citation.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

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  CY98B  lieutenant  colonel  board  which
convened on 1 June 1998.

OPR profile since 1991, follows:

      PERIOD ENDING               EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

       15 Jun 91  Meets Standards (MS)
       31 May 92         MS
       31 May 93         MS
       31 May 94         MS
       31 May 95         MS
       31 May 96         MS
       31 May 97         MS
       31 May 98         MS

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Promotion, Evaluation and  Recognition  Division,  reviewed
the application and states that the applicant’s contention   that  the
MSM 2OLC should have been filed in  his  OSR  for  the  CY98B  board’s
review is unfounded.  They state by Air Force directive, a  decoration
is required to be placed into official channels within two years  from
the end of the service for which it is being given, and awarded within
three years.  Once the special order is accomplished, a decoration  is
to be placed in the OSR within 30 days.  Until a special order is cut,
a decoration does not exist.  They state  the  applicant’s  period  of
service for the MSM 2OLC ended on 13 August 1997.  His decoration  was
required to be completed and awarded by August 2000.  It  was  special
ordered in November 1998 and filed in his OSR on 3 December 1998, well
within regulatory requirements.  However, the decoration did not exist
when the CY98B board convened.  Therefore, they believe the  MSM  2OLC
was accomplished in direct accordance with applicable  directives  and
do not believe SSB consideration with inclusion of  the  MSM  2OLC  is
warranted.

In  reference  to  the  statement  from  Col  L---  stating  that  the
decoration was placed in a safe and not discovered until  sometime  in
July 1998; they ask:  (1) When did the applicant discover the MSM 2OLC
was missing from his records?  (2) Did he notice  the  decoration  was
missing in early 1998 when he received and  reviewed  a  copy  of  his
officer  preselection  brief  (OPB),  or  sometime  after  the   board
convened?  And, (3) if the applicant did find out  the  MSM  2OLC  was
missing from his records after a review of his OPB in early 1998, what
steps did he take to ensure the decoration was present for  review  by
the CY98B board?  They state that they found no evidence he wrote  the
CY98B board to make  them  aware  of  the  missing  decoration.   They
further quote AFI 36-2501 stating, “Officers will not be considered by
SSB if, in exercising reasonable diligence, the  officer  should  have
discovered an error or omission in  his/her  records  and  could  have
taken  timely  corrective  action.”   Therefore,  they   believe   the
applicant did not take timely corrective action to ensure  his  record
was accurate  when  he  competed  for  promotion  in  June  1998,  and
recommend denial of his request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that:

    (1) Historically, there is a  1%  chance  of  being  selected  for
lieutenant colonel as a pass-over with a “Promote”  recommendation  on
the Promotion Recommendation Form.  He states one possible  reason  he
may not have been selected for promotion is  because  this  decoration
was not in his promotion folder.  He states the board members look for
any  discriminator  in  the  files  of  those  being  considered   for
promotion.  The missing medal was a discriminator.

    (2) In reference to AFPC stating that a decoration is required  to
be placed into official channels within two years from the end of  the
service for which it is being given; he states that  he  accepts  what
the regulation  says,  however,  if  this  guidance  is  followed,  he
believes he is being punished because it took 15 months for this award
to be placed in his records and during that time the  promotion  board
met.

    (3) In reference to AFPC stating that Colonel L--- was not in  his
rating chain, he states that is incorrect.  He was the director of the
organization he worked in.  He further states that  Colonel  L---  was
his immediate supervisor’s boss.  Therefore, he was in  the  chain  of
command.

    (4) He states that he did notice that this award was missing  when
he received a copy of his officer preselection brief.   He  states  he
made numerous attempts to determine the status of his award,  both  in
advance of the promotion board and after.  Additionally, he  contacted
his previous supervisor and so did his current supervisor  to  request
that the award be completed before the promotion board.  He states  in
retrospect he could have written a letter to the promotion board,  but
did not want to call attention to a missing award.

    (5) In reference to AFPC stating that officers will be  considered
by SSB if, in exercising reasonable diligence, the officer should have
discovered an error or omission in  his/her  records  and  could  have
taken timely corrective action.  He states he contacted  his  previous
supervisor on the submission of the award before the board.  There was
no further corrective action he could have taken to get the  award  in
his record before the board met.

In closing, he states that if you use the argument  that  awards  have
two years to be placed in records; then not having this award  in  his
promotion folder should not have impacted his promotion.   He  further
states that this award took 15 months to be  placed  in  his  records.
This delay caused him to have a promotion file that was incomplete and
did not truly  reflect  his  achievements.   It  is  now  the  Board’s
judgment  that  will  determine  if  this  missing  award   may   have
contributed to his non-selection for promotion.  He states that if the
Board decides that it  did,  he  is  asking  for  his  records  to  be
corrected and that  he  be  considered  for  promotion  to  lieutenant
colonel by SSB.

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.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 13 July 1999, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member
                 Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
                 Ms. Phyllis L. Spence, Examiner (without vote)

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Feb 99, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 18 Feb 99.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Mar 99.
      Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated 2 Apr 99, w/atch.




                             VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
                             Panel Chair