RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 97-02960 (Case 2)
            INDEX CODE:  131.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for promotion to the grade  of  major  by  a  Special
Selection Board (SSB) for the CY94A (22 Aug 94) Major Board  (P0494A),
with a corrected officer selection record (OSR).

It appears he is requesting that his P0494A  Promotion  Recommendation
Form (PRF) be upgraded from a  “promote”  to  a  “definitely  promote”
recommendation.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The information seen by the CY94A Central Majors Board contained  duty
title errors/omissions and his Air Force Achievement Medal, First  Oak
Leaf Cluster (AFAM, 1OLC) and the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) were
not in his OSR.

He was informed about  a  matrix  used  by  the  89  Operations  Group
commander (89 OG/CC), which had unauthorized information for promotion
recommendations.  The tactics used by the 89th did not work and he was
passed over on his in-the-zone promotion.  Due to an IG  inquiry,  the
AF/IG ordered a re-look for all majors and subsequently numerous other
boards at Andrews AFB.  The 89 AW/CC’s boss (21 AF/CC)  conducted  the
re-look.  Both the 89  AW/CC  and  89  OG/CC  were  aware  of  his  IG
complaint.  In his opinion, there  is  no  doubt  that  the  21  AF/CC
confided with the 89 AW/CC on his recommendations.

In support of his request, applicant submits five  applications,  with
copies  of  documents  associated  with  the  issues  cited   in   his
contentions (Exhibit A).

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 7 May 1983,  the  applicant  was  appointed  a  second  lieutenant,
Reserve of the Air Force, and  was  voluntarily  ordered  to  extended
active duty on 14 January 1984.  He was integrated  into  the  Regular
Air Force in the grade of captain on 12 March 1991.  The applicant has
been progressively promoted to the grade of major, effective and  with
a date of rank of 1 January 1996.

The applicant's initial  request  for  correction  of  his  assignment
history was administratively corrected subsequent to the  CY94A  Major
Board.  A review of the Personnel Data System (PDS) confirms that  the
corrections were made as follows:  3 Dec 86,  Combat  Rescue  Aircraft
Commander,   DAFSC   of   1025G;   13   Mar    92,    Chief    Current
Operations/Scheduling, Helicopter, DAFSC of 1025G, Andrews AFB; and, 1
Feb 93, Deputy  Flight  Commander/UH-1N  Instructor  Pilot,  DAFSC  of
1425L.

The applicant was awarded the Air Force Achievement Medal,  First  Oak
Leaf Cluster (AFAM, 1OLC), for outstanding  achievement  on  7 October
1992  by  Special  Order  GZ-19,  dated  3  March  1994.   Review   of
applicant’s military personnel records reveals that the decoration was
filed in his records on 16 October 1997.

Due  to  an  administrative  error,  the  inclusive  periods  for  the
Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) were incorrect (MSM awarded by Special
Order GA-032, dated 17 February 1995).  The inclusive  dates  for  the
decoration have subsequently been  administratively  corrected  (Order
#GA-006, dated 21 October 1997) to read 27 March 1991 - 3 August 1994,
vice 27 March 1991 - 28 August 1994.

Applicant's OPR profile, commencing with the report  closing  12 March
1992, follows:

            Period Ending    Evaluation

               12 Mar 92     Meets Standards (MS) - Captain
               30 Sep 93          MS
            #  30 Apr 94          MS
            ##  5 Mar 95          MS
                5 Mar 96          MS - Major
                5 Mar 97          MS
               15 Dec 97          MS

# Top report at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to major by the CY94A Central Major Board, which convened on
22 August 1994.

## Top report at the time he was considered and selected for promotion
to major by the CY95A Central Major Board, which convened  on  5  June
1995.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Directorate of Assignments, HQ AFPC/DPAIS1,  has  administratively
corrected the  applicant’s  duty  history  entries  as  requested.   A
complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C.

The  Directorate  of  Personnel  Program  Management,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPA,
reviewed this application and recommended denial.  DPPPA  stated  that
the application is not timely filed.  The contested  duty  corrections
date back as far as Dec 86 to Jan 93 - all of which  could  have  been
challenged when they were updated in the Personnel Data System (PDS).

With regard to the Air Force Achievement Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster
(AFAM, 1OLC) not being in his OSR when reviewed by the  P0494A  board,
DPPPA stated that in researching  the  applicant’s  officer  selection
record (OSR), they noted that the citation was still not filed.  DPPPA
added a copy of the citation to his OSR.   DPPPA  indicated  that  the
purpose of having a citation included in the record is  not  to  allow
board members the opportunity to peruse the comments thereon, although
they may do so if they are so inclined.  Rather,  the  purpose  is  to
make them aware of the level of  the  decorations.   Even  though  the
AFAM, 1OLC, citation was not on file for the board, it was in evidence
before the board.  Not only was there a discrepancy letter in the OSR,
which requested a copy of the citation, but the  decoration  was  also
annotated on the Officer Selection Brief  (OSB).   DPPPA  stated  that
since the board members were aware of the decoration, it was  factored
into the promotion evaluation.

As to the duty history corrections, DPPPA stated  that  the  applicant
made several requests for either duty history entries to be  added  or
for them to be corrected.   HQ  AFPC/DPAIS1  has  made  the  requested
corrections.  DPPPA indicated that if these duty history entries  were
in error during the P0494A board, then they were also in error when he
was considered by his below-the-promotion zone (BPZ)  boards  in  1992
and 1993.  Applicant provides nothing to demonstrate he made an effort
to get these errors corrected prior to his BPZ boards  as  they  would
have been reflected on  the  Officer  Preselection  Briefs  (OPBs)  he
received prior to each of those boards.  DPPPA further indicated  that
these errors were in  evidence  at  the  P0495A  board  in  which  the
applicant was selected for promotion above-the-promotion  zone  (APZ).
DPPPA does not support promotion reconsideration for the P0494A  board
since the correct information regarding the applicant’s  duty  history
was available to the board via his Officer Performance Reports (OPRs).

DPPPA stated that the 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.  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 his/her  records  and  could  have
taken timely corrective action.”  DPPPA indicated that  the  applicant
had more than ample opportunity to attempt to  get  these  corrections
made by both his BPZ and I/APZ boards.

A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinions  and  indicated  that  he
completed the local  process  of  getting  his  MSM  date  changed  to
coincide with his true departure date  from  Andrews  AFB,  which  was
almost a month before the CY94A (22  Aug  94)  Major  Selection  Board
(P0494A).  He would like an opportunity to meet a  supplemental  board
due to his MSM not meeting the original board.  The lack of an MSM  or
for that matter any decoration for his tenure at Andrews  painted  the
wrong picture.  It was not until recently, with the help of a  records
specialist, that the errors  were  discovered.   He  tried  to  get  a
microfiche copy of his records back in 1994, but was told  the  system
would be down for quite some time (approximately a year).  If he would
have had a copy of the film, he  would  have  noticed  the  Air  Force
Achievement Medal missing from his record, it was in the record  which
was kept at base level.  The only  correction  he  attempted  to  make
prior to the board was the 20 Apr 93 duty history,  because  it  stuck
out as pending.  The inclusive dates on the previous MSM did not close
out until after the P0404A board.  The new dates  show  that  the  MSM
should have been included for the board members to see.  The  omission
of this award was detrimental to his promotion -  it  sent  the  wrong
signal to the board members.

He would like the opportunity to meet the supplemental board with  the
corrections to his  records.   HQ  AFPC/DPPPA  seems  to  think  every
officer should know all  the  ins  and  outs  of  checking  and  cross
checking ones own record, this is definitely not  the  case.   If  the
records personnel cannot find these significant errors, how is someone
with an untrained eye supposed to catch them?

A complete copy of the response is appended at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Directorate of Personnel Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, stated
that an Inspector  General  (IG)  investigation  revealed  that  group
commanders had used inappropriate procedures when  they  prepared  the
Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs) for  the  P0494A  board.   As  a
result of the IG’s findings, a  new  senior  rater  was  appointed  to
review all of the P0494A PRFs prepared by the command.  The new senior
rater determined the applicant’s “P” promotion recommendation  on  the
original PRF to be a valid assessment  of  the  applicant’s  promotion
potential.  DPPPA therefore  determined  the  applicant’s  request  to
receive SSB consideration by the P0494A board, with an  upgraded  PRF,
without basis since the new senior rater found his original PRF valid.

DPPPA stated the applicant’s contention that he should  be  considered
for promotion to the grade of major with inclusion of a corrected  MSM
citation is unfounded.  The erroneous  MSM  was  not  a  part  of  the
applicant’s OSR as reviewed by the P0494A board—nor was it required to
be.  The amendment prepared in Oct 97 changed only the ending date  of
the period of service from 28 Aug 94 to 3 Aug 94.  The  fact  the  end
date was 3 Aug or 28 Aug is irrelevant because in both instances,  the
decoration was required to be completed and awarded to  the  applicant
by Aug 97.  The special order for the MSM was originally dated 17  Feb
95, well within regulatory requirements.  Once the  special  order  is
accomplished, a decoration is to be placed in the OSR within 60  days.
In this instance, the MSM should have been filed  in  the  applicant’s
OSR no later than 18 Apr 95.  The citation for the MSM  was  filed  in
the applicant’s  OSR  on  2  Mar  95,  in  accordance  with  governing
directives.  Since a decoration does not exist until a  special  order
is cut and the original decoration  was  special  ordered  six  months
after the board, the citation was not required  to  be  filed  in  the
applicant’s OSR when the P0494A board convened on 22  Aug  94.   DPPPA
would be opposed to the applicant receiving SSB consideration on  this
issue since the MSM did not exist when the board convened (Exhibit G).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

With regard to the Inspector General (IG) investigation, he was  chief
of the aircrew training division for the 89 AW  at  the  time  of  PRF
preparations.  From what he has been told by three squadron commanders
in the 89th Operations Group, the group commander  had  numerous  mini
promotion boards with his squadron commanders prior to forwarding  his
rack-and-stack to the Wing CC for indorsement.  He  received  his  PRF
the day before he was PCSing for his new duty location.  He received a
“Promote” recommendation, not a word was changed from the original PRF
he wrote on himself other than the last word, which was  changed  from
definitely promote to promote.  In October 1998, after  receiving  the
news of his nonselection, he was called by all three of  the  squadron
commanders informing him of what had taken place with the mini-boards.
 After his selection as operations officer, he  was  dropped  to  just
below the “definitely promote” cutoff line because the group commander
felt sure he would be promoted with a “Promote”  and  the  “Definitely
Promote” could be used for getting someone else with less of a  record
promoted also.

As to the MSM, he feels the MSM should  have  been  included  for  the
promotion board to consider since it closed out on 3 Aug  94  and  the
promotion board was not until 22 Aug 94.  The group commander told him
he would ensure the MSM would make it into his record before the board
met.  On 15 Aug 94, he checked on the status  of  the  award  and  was
informed that it had been sent back to the Group for corrections  then
it was misplaced in all the shuffle.   Board  members  get  the  wrong
impression when one doesn’t receive an award for their hard work.   He
knows what the regulations say about having two years to get an  award
but the fact is that the award was intended to be in his records.

A complete copy of the response is appended at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application concerning the decorations and the PRF was  timely
filed.  The application concerning the duty  history  corrections  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.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we  agree  with  the  opinions  and  recommendations  of  the
respective Air Force offices and adopt their rationale  as  the  basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of  an
injustice.  Therefore, absent sufficient 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 5 January 1999, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Benedict A. Kausal IV , Panel Chair
                  Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
                  Mrs. Margaret A. Zook, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 97, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAIS1, dated 9 Oct 97.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, dated 24 Oct 97.
   Exhibit E.  Letters, SAF/MIBR, dated 10 Nov 97 and 12 Oct 98.
   Exhibit F.  Letter from applicant, dated 7 Dec 97.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, dated 17 Sep 98.
   Exhibit H.  Letter from applicant, undated (datafax dated
               25 Nov 98).




                                   BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV
                                   Panel Chair