RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01256
                       INDEX CODE:  131.00

      APPLICANT  COUNSEL:  None

      SSN        HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His Officer Selection Brief (OSB)  be  corrected  to  reflect  his
current duty title and Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC)  and  his
overseas duty history be corrected.

2.  His corrected record be considered for promotion to the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar
Year 2001B (CY01B) Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His OSB did not reflect his correct  overseas  duty  history  nor  his
current DAFSC and Duty Title for the CY01B central lieutenant  colonel
selection board.

He went to Randolph  to  review  his  records,  however,  the  records
section was unable to produce a copy of his records for him to review.
 He did not receive the first copy of his OSB, but received  a  second
copy in October 2001.  He went to  the  MPF  to  notify  them  of  the
errors.  An employee of the MPF  pulled  his  information  up  in  the
system and his overseas duty  history  was  listed.   They  could  not
explain why the information was not on his  OSB.   He  was  unable  to
update his record prior to the board because his father became ill and
later passed away and  he  was  very  busy  with  the  deployment  for
Operation Enduring Freedom.

Applicant's complete  submission,  with  attachment,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major.

Applicant was considered, but not selected for promotion to the  grade
of  lieutenant  colonel  by  the  CY01B  central  lieutenant   colonel
selection board.

Applicant’s OPR profile as a major is listed below.

                 PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

                  2 May 98        Meets Standards
                  2 May 99        Meets Standards
                  9 Jun 00        Meets Standards
                  9 Jun 01        Meets Standards

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPAO states the MPR has  accurately  updated  the  applicant's
duty history based on source documentation on file (Exhibit C).

HQ AFPC/DPPPOO states  every  eligible  officer  is  sent  an  officer
preselection  brief  (OPB)  90-100  days  before  the  central   board
convenes.  The brief contains information that will be on the  OSB  at
the  central  board.   The  instructions  contained  in  the  Military
Personnel Flight Memorandum which is attached to  the  OPB  gives  the
officer specific instructions on reviewing the brief and what  actions
can be taken to correct errors before  the  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 correction  action."   The  MPF  informed  the
applicant that they did not have access to correct  his  current  AFSC
and duty title, and for him to contact his supervisor and  command  to
correct these errors.  The applicant has not provided any evidence  to
indicate he contacted his supervisor or command to correct the errors.


DPPPOO duly notes the applicant's contention that  his  overseas  duty
history was not reflected on his OPB, however, his top  three  officer
performance reports that met the board did  reflect  his  Japan  tour.
Furthermore, he received a Meritorious Service  Medal  for  his  Japan
tour, and this citation was on file when his record met the board.

The central boards evaluate the  service  members'  entire  OSR.   The
central boards consider the  members'  job  performance,  professional
qualities, depth and breadth of experience, leadership,  and  academic
and professional military  education.   They  also  include  in  their
assessment for promotion consideration promotion recommendation forms,
officer performance reports, officer effectiveness  reports,  training
reports, letters of  evaluation,  decorations  and  officer  selection
briefs.

There is no clear evidence that the  incorrect  duty  information  and
missing  overseas  duty  history  negatively  impacted  his  promotion
opportunity.  DPPPOO is not convinced  the  contested  errors  on  the
applicant's  OSB  contributed  to  his  nonselection.   Based  on  the
evidence  provided  they  recommend  the  applicant's  request  to  be
considered for promotion by a Special Selection Board be denied.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
16 August 2002, for review and response within 30 days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice. After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of  record,  we  are  not  sufficiently  persuaded  that  the
applicant should be provided consideration for promotion to the  grade
of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board  for  the  Calendar
Year 2001B selection board.  Although the  applicant’s  overseas  duty
history  was  missing  on  the  Officer  Selection   Brief   and   has
subsequently  been  corrected,  we  note  that  this  assignment   was
reflected, not only on the citation for his Meritorious Service Medal,
First Oak Leaf Cluster, but it was also reflected  on  the  top  three
Officer Performance Reports in his  selection  record  which  met  the
selection board.  Therefore, we are persuaded that the  board  members
were aware of  this  assignment.   With  respect  to  the  applicant’s
current duty title and DAFSC issues on the Officer Selection Brief, we
note that while these were not reflected in his selection  record,  we
find no evidence that he attempted to correct his  record  before  the
selection board convened.  We also are not persuaded by  the  evidence
before  us  that  these  omissions  were  the  sole  causes  for   the
applicant’s non-selection to the grade of lieutenant colonel, nor  are
we  persuaded  that  the  lack  thereof  significantly  impacted   his
promotion  opportunity.   In  summary,  we  do  not  find  applicant's
numerous assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive  to
override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  Therefore, we agree
with the recommendation of  the  Air  Force  and  adopt  the  rational
expressed as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant failed to
sustain his burden of establishing the existence of either an error or
an injustice warranting favorable action on these requests.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
01256 in Executive Session on 1 October 2002 under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                 Mr. James E. Short, Member
                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Apr 02, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Officer Selection Brief.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 22 May 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRPO, dated 13 Aug 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Aug 02.




                                        DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                        Panel Chair