RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS



IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-01255

            INDEX NUMBER:  100.05; 131.01


            COUNSEL:  NONE


            HEARING DESIRED: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Officer Performance Reports (OPRs)  closing  24  Mar  1995  and
14 Jan 1996, be changed to reflect the instructor prefix “K” on his
Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) of 12B3B; the DAFSCs of 12B3B
in the Assignment History section of his Officer  Selection  Briefs
(OSBs)  for  the  Calendar  Years  1996  (CY96),  CY98,  and   CY99
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards be changed to K12B3B; and  that
he be considered for promotion to the grade of  lieutenant  colonel
by Special Selection Boards (SSBs) for the CY96 (8  Jul  96),  CY98
(1 Jun 98), and  CY99  (19 Apr  99)  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selection
Boards.

If the Board grants his appeal, the  applicant  requests  that  his
letters to the presidents of the CY98 and CY99  Lieutenant  Colonel
Selection Boards be  removed  from  his  Officer  Selection  Record
(OSR).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not aware until his counseling in Oct 98, after he  was  not
selected for promotion, that the “K” prefix was  missing  from  his
DAFSC.  The omission of the instructor prefix from his DAFSC in the
Assignment History of his OSB and from the OPRs indicates a  flawed
career  progression   and   negative   performance,   which   could
significantly impact on his promotion.  The fact that he was a  B-1
instructor with increased responsibilities while assigned to Det. 4
removes  the   perceived   negative   performance   indicator   and
unsuccessful career progression.

He performed instructor flights to maintain  his  proficiency.   He
kept his instructor status after his permanent change of assignment
(PCA)  from  the  B-1  Formal  Training  Unit  (FTU)  Squadron   to
Detachment X, XXth Training Systems Squadron (TSS).  He  maintained
full instructor qualification to retain B-1 expertise  to  validate
his duties.  He flew 74.5 hours in the B-1 as an instructor  during
this period.

His request to correct the DAFSC on his OPRs and OSB was denied  by
the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board.

While investigating the reason the instructor  prefix  was  omitted
from his DAFSC, he learned from his rater that a co-worker with the
same DAFSC problem appealed  to  the  AFBCMR  and  his  appeal  was
granted.

During his investigation,  he  also  learned  that  the  authorized
position he held while assigned to Det. 4 was  finally  changed  to
include the instructor position.  According to the  rater,  it  had
taken this long to correct the authorized manpower position  to  an
instructor position.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided the OSBs  reviewed
by  the  CY96,  CY98,  and  CY99  Lieutenant  Colonel  Boards;  the
contested  reports;  flight  records;  his  letters  to  the  board
presidents for the CY98 and CY99 boards; supporting statements from
the rater; and other documents associated  with  the  issues  under
review (Exhibit A).

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information  extracted  from  the  Personnel  Data   System   (PDS)
indicates that Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve
of the Air Force, on 17 Oct 82.   He  was  voluntarily  ordered  to
extended active duty on the same date.  He is currently serving  on
active duty in the grade of major, having  been  promoted  to  that
grade, effective 1 Sep 94.

Applicant's Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile for  the  last
10 reporting periods follows:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION

      30 Aug 91  Meets Standards
      20 Apr 92  Meets Standards
      20 Apr 93  Meets Standards
      24 Mar 94  Meets Standards
      24 Mar 95  Meets Standards
   *  14 Jan 96  Meets Standards
      14 Jan 97  Meets Standards
      12 Dec 97  Training Report
  **  14 Jan 98  Meets Standards
 ***  14 Jan 99  Meets Standards

*Top report CY96 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, which convened
on 8 Jul 96.
**Top  report  CY98  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selection  Board,   which
convened on 1 Jun 98.
***Top  report  CY99  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selection  Board,  which
convened on 19 Apr 99.

Applicant was considered and not  selected  for  promotion  to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY96 (below the  promotion  zone
(BPZ)), CY98 (in the promotion zone (IPZ)),  and  CY99  (above  the
promotion zone (APZ)) Selection Boards.


AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The Assignment Information  Systems  Branch,  AFPC/DPAPS,  reviewed
this application and stated that the applicant’s OPRs  reflect  the
same DAFSC as the duty history section in the PDS  and  is  correct
based on manpower authorizations at the time.  If the AFBCMR grants
relief, the OPRs should be  corrected  to  reflect  the  instructor
prefix K12B3B, vice 12B3B, and the assignment  history  section  of
the PDS should be corrected to reflect the same.  The evaluation is
at Exhibit C.

The Promotion, Evaluation,  and  Recognition  Division,  AFPC/DPPP,
reviewed this application and recommended that it  be  time-barred.
The alleged errors have been discoverable since publication of  the
reports  and  the  DAFSC  entries,  more  than  3   and   5   years
respectively.

The application may also be dismissed under the doctrine of laches,
which denies relief to one who  has  unreasonably  and  inexcusably
delayed in  asserting  a  claim.   The  applicant  has  inexcusably
delayed his appeal, providing  no  explanation.   His  unreasonable
delay has greatly complicated the Air Force’s ability to  determine
the merits of his position.

DPPP noted that the ERAB denied the applicant’s appeal and accepted
their assessment of the application.  The applicant’s appeal to the
ERAB challenging the verbiage in his Promotion Recommendation  Form
(PRF) for the CY98 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board was  approved
and he  was  granted  promotion  reconsideration  by  an  SSB  that
convened on 24 May 99.  He was not selected.  The applicant has two
nonselections for promotion to lieutenant  colonel.   He  is  again
eligible for APZ consideration by the CY99 (30 Nov  99)  Lieutenant
Colonel Selection Board.

The applicant contends that his  DAFSC  on  the  contested  reports
should read “K12B3B.”  The PDS cannot reflect this DAFSC until  the
reports have been corrected.  The applicant’s rater on the  reports
indicates the applicant’s primary duties  were  instructor  duties.
However,  the  unit  manning  document  (UMD)  did  not  have   the
applicant’s position identified with the “K”  prefix  when  he  was
assigned.   Even  though  an  authorization  change   request   was
subsequently approved, the request would  not  be  retroactive  and
does not change the fact that the applicant was  not  occupying  an
instructor billet.  As such, the OPRs were accurately prepared with
the appropriate DAFSC.  DPPP noted that the applicant’s  instructor
duties were discussed in the contested reports and in  his  letters
to the board presidents.  Therefore, the board members  were  aware
he was an instructor pilot.

Regarding removal of the applicant’s letters to the  presidents  of
the CY98 and CY99 boards, DPPP has no objection to their removal if
the appeal is granted.

The applicant is also requesting reconsideration for  promotion  by
his first BPZ board.  The Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) is  sent
to each eligible officer several months prior to a selection board.
 The OPB contains data that will appear on the OSB for the  central
board.  If errors are found on the OPB, corrective action  must  be
taken  prior  to  the  selection  board.   The  instructions   that
accompany  the  OPB  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.”  If the applicant had challenged the DAFSC when
he received his first BPZ preselection brief in 1996, DPPP believes
it would have been possible to request a change to the UMD prior to
his in or above the promotion zone boards.

A complete copy of DPPP’s evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant challenged  DPPP’s  recommendation  to  time-bar  the
application on the basis that there has been precedence in changing
records that have been a matter of record for more  than  3  years.
The ERAB corrected his 1983 training report by adding that he was a
Distinguished Graduate (DG) from  the  Defense  Language  Institute
even though the report was a matter of  record  for  more  than  16
years.  He states he knew there was a  problem  with  the  training
report since his 2-year BPZ consideration  to  lieutenant  colonel.
Still, the ERAB changed the contested report.  With this change, he
had his in the  promotion  zone  PRF  changed  to  include  the  DG
achievement and he is appealing his 2-year below the  zone  PRF  to
also include the achievement.

The applicant states he was not an instructor pilot,  as  the  DPPP
evaluation suggests.  He was a  B-1  Instructor  Offensive  Systems
Officer.  He was told by a counselor  that  even  though  the  OPRs
state he is an instructor, promotion board members would  not  have
an opportunity to read  the  affected  OPRs  because  of  the  many
records they have to consider.  The counselor further stated if the
corrected instructor prefix were in the duty history  of  the  OSB,
which is seen by  the  board  members,  it  would  show  no  flawed
progression or negative performance.

Regarding writing a letter to the board,  he  received  conflicting
guidance from senior officers as to how the board might  view  such
communications.

The applicant’s complete response with attachments is at Exhibit F.

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.     Sufficient  relevant  evidence   has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of  probable  error  or  injustice.   The
applicant’s OPRs closing 24 Mar 1995 and 14 Jan 1996, appear to  be
incorrect with respect to the “K” prefix which indicates instructor
duties.  It is apparent in Section III, Job  Description,  Item  2,
Key Duties, Tasks, and Responsibilities, that the applicant was the
Lead  Instructor  Offensive  Systems  Officer  during  the  periods
covered by the reports.  In  this  regard,  the  documentation  and
supporting statements provided by  the  applicant  corroborate  his
contention that there was an inordinate delay in the processing  of
the Authorization Change Request (ACR) required to correct the Unit
Manning Document (UMD) to include the K12B3B  instructor  position.
We note that the  ACR  has  subsequently  been  approved  and  this
position is now included on the UMD.  In addition, the rater states
that the applicant’s primary duties  were  instructor  duties.   In
view of the above, the Board believes that the applicant’s  records
should be corrected to the extent indicated below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

      a.    The AF Forms  707A,  Field  Grade  Officer  Performance
Reports, rendered for the periods 25 March 1994  through  24  March
1995 and 25 March 1995 through 14 January 1996,  be  amended  under
Section 4, DAFSC, to read “K12B3B” rather than “12B3B.”

      b.    A “K” prefix be added to his Duty Air  Force  Specialty
Code (DAFSC) for the 28 March 1994, 14 October 1994, 1 October 1995
and 14 October 1995 entries in his Assignment History  sections  of
the Air Force Officer Selection Briefs for Selection Board  P0596C,
Sequence Number 103906, prepared 18 July 1996; and Selection  Board
P0598B, Sequence Number 002872, prepared 19 May 1998.

      c.    A “K” prefix be added to his Duty Air  Force  Specialty
Code (DAFSC) for the 28 March 1994 and 14 October 1994  entries  in
his Assignment History section of the Air Force  Officer  Selection
Brief for Selection Board P0599A, Sequence Number 003066,  prepared
15 April 1999, and to any subsequent Officer Selection Brief.

      d.    The applicant’s letters to the presidents of the CY98B,
CY99A and CY99B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards be removed from
his Officer Selection Record.

It is further recommended that the applicant’s corrected record  be
considered for promotion to the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  by
Special Selection Board for the CY96C Lieutenant Colonel  Selection
Board and any subsequent boards in which the corrections were not a
matter of record.

The following members of the Board considered this  application  in
Executive Session on 6 January 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

            Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
            Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
            Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

All members voted to correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 May 99, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAPS, dated 11 Jun 99.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPP, dated 9 Aug 99, w/atch.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 23 Aug 99.
      Exhibit F.  Letters, Applicant,  dated  14  and  16  Sep  99,
w/atchs.




               CHARLES E. BENNETT
               Panel Chair
AFBCMR 99-01255


MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the
authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat
116), it is directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

            a.   The AF Forms 707A, Field Grade Officer Performance
Reports, rendered for the periods 25 March 1994 through 24 March
1995 and 25 March 1995 through 14 January 1996, be amended under
Section 4, DAFSC, to read “K12B3B” rather than “12B3B.”

            b.   A “K” prefix be added to his Duty Air Force
Specialty Code (DAFSC) for the 28 March 1994, 14 October 1994, 1
October 1995 and 14 October 1995 entries in his Assignment History
sections of the Air Force Officer Selection Briefs for Selection
Board P0596C, Sequence Number 103906, prepared 18 July 1996; and
Selection Board P0598B, Sequence Number 002872, prepared 19 May
1998.

            c.   A “K” prefix be added to his Duty Air Force
Specialty Code (DAFSC) for the 28 March 1994 and 14 October 1994
entries in his Assignment History section of the Air Force Officer
Selection Brief for Selection Board P0599A, Sequence Number 003066,
prepared 15 April 1999, and to any subsequent Officer Selection
Brief.

            d.   The applicant’s letters to the presidents of the
CY98B, CY99A and CY99B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards be
removed from his Officer Selection Record.

      It is further directed that the applicant’s corrected record
be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by
Special Selection Board for the CY96C Lieutenant Colonel Selection
Board and any subsequent boards in which the corrections were not a
matter of record.




                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER

                                        Director

                                        Air Force Review Boards
Agency