RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02359
            INDEX CODE:  131.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be given Special Selection Board (SSB)consideration for  promotion
to the grade of major by the Calendar Year 2002A (CY02A) Central Major
Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her Officer Selection Brief (OSB) used during the CY02A board  was  in
error in that an erroneous date of separation (DOS) was present;  that
the error was discovered by the  Air  Force  Personnel  Center  (AFPC)
after she was not selected for promotion; and, that   her  record  was
considered by an SSB on 6 May 02 with this correction made,  but  with
no opportunity for her to examine the record  for  other  errors  that
might have affected the outcome of the board.  This SSB was  conducted
for her record in a way that was highly unusual.  Since the results of
the central selection board had not been released,  and  because  AFPC
was attempting to correct their mistake regarding DOS indications, she
was not given the benefit of nonselection counseling.  Such counseling
would have brought to her attention the affect that these errors might
have had on her record.  Most importantly, her preparation for the SSB
could have been more complete, which she believes would have  resulted
in her selection for promotion.

The SSB was presented nonselection records from the CY02A Major  Board
with the DOS masked and the knowledge that this indication  meant  the
person being considered for promotion had  a  DOS  on  their  previous
record.  This practice will be in place  for  the  upcoming  promotion
board, as well.  She believes this fact prevented the SSB from  seeing
her indefinite DOS and may have caused them to question her dedication
to military service.  Even though her  actual  record  was  officially
corrected by the time the SSB met, the promotion record  seen  by  the
SSB read the same as a person who  truly  intended  to  separate  from
military service.  With the strict promotion quotas and high level  of
competition seen at officer promotion boards, the  masked  DOS,  which
should have read “indefinite,” made her record less competitive.

Her Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) indicated  an  incorrect  duty
title.  The duty title  that  appeared  at  the  promotion  board  was
“Assistant Flight Commander, T-1 Instructor Pilot”.  The  actual  duty
title that she held as  of  26  Nov  01  was  “Chief,  Flight  Support
Operations/T-1 Instructor Pilot.”   This  correct  position  indicates
progression in responsibility and reflects a  Flight  Commander  level
job in the 32 Flying Training Squadron.  She asked for the duty  title
to be corrected prior to the date that the PRF was finalized,  but  no
action was taken on her behalf.

According to the demographic data, her completion of Squadron  Officer
School (SOS) through correspondence  put  her  at  a  disadvantage  in
comparison with her year group.  In 1999, when she was offered a quota
slot for  in-residence  Professional  Military  Education  (PME),  the
career emphasis was for all captains  to  attend  in  residence.   She
accepted this training.  A short time after accepting the PME, she was
informed that since she was pregnant, she  would  not  be  allowed  to
attend.  She was very frustrated by the turn of events, since she  was
able to get a waiver to fly while pregnant, but not to attend PME.  It
is her understanding that Air Command and Staff  College  (ACSC),  the
next level of PME, does not prohibit pregnant members from  attending.
She was not offered another in-residence slot, most likely because she
was again pregnant as soon as her duty limitations  were  lifted  from
the first pregnancy.  In order to continue her  career  training,  she
elected to complete SOS by correspondence.  She feels  this  path  was
the only option available to her as a  female  officer  with  multiple
pregnancies.  She does not feel that this  method  of  PME  completion
should be counted as a penalty against a career for which she is  very
proud.

In  support  of  her  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, copies of her  OSB  and  CY02A  PRF,  and  other  documents
associated with the matter under review.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
captain, having been promoted to that grade on 27 May 96.   Her  Total
Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 27 May 92.

Applicant's Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile follows:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION

       3 Dec 92  Meets Standards
      17 Dec 93  Training Report
      17 Dec 94  Meets Standards
       1 Oct 95  Meets Standards
       1 Oct 96  Meets Standards
       1 Oct 97  Meets Standards
       1 Oct 98  Meets Standards
      18 Oct 99  Meets Standards
      31 Aug 00  Meets Standards
  #   31 Aug 01  Meets Standards

# Top Report at the  time  she  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of major by the CY02A Central  Major  Selection
Board.

On 6  May  02,  the  applicant  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of major by an SSB.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO indicated that the applicant’s OSB  displayed  an  incorrect
picture of  her  assignment  history  and  may  have  resulted  in  an
incorrect representation of her career progression  to  the  selection
board.  They have confirmed  that  the  applicant’s  record  has  been
updated and currently reflects her actual history as outlined  in  her
application.  Additionally, they  can  confirm  that  the  applicant’s
request to withdraw her established DOS was received on 6 Feb  02  and
approved on 22 Feb 02.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPAP indicated that although the statistics provided  appears  to
validate the assertion that the applicant's method  of  completion  of
SOS affected her promotion competitiveness, they  could  not  validate
that this was the reason she was not selected for promotion to  major.
Furthermore, the statistics may not be an entirely accurate picture of
the overall promotion results since the SSB results were  not  in  the
statistical analysis provided.  Therefore, AFPC/DPAP recommended  that
the applicant’s record be considered only if the other items addressed
in her application warrant consideration.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPPEB recommended denial indicating that the applicant  has  not
provided a new PRF with supportive documentation from the senior rater
and  management  level  review  (MLR)  president.   In  addition,  the
applicant has not demonstrated she took corrective action upon receipt
and review of her PRF prior to the CY02A board.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPEB evaluation is at Exhibit E.

AFPC/DPPP  recommended  denial.   They  indicated  that  although  the
applicant had requested that her voluntary DOS be  withdrawn,  it  was
not approved prior to the convening of the  board.   Because  she  was
affected by Stop Loss, her record and all those records with voluntary
separation dates affected by  Stop  Loss  had  an  AFPC-generated  DOS
updated on their OSB.  On 8 Apr 02, the applicant and all  other  Stop
Loss-affected officers were provided the opportunity to  meet  an  SSB
with a corrected DOS, regardless of whether  they  were  a  select  or
nonselect of the central board.  No officer was given the  opportunity
to review his or her  record  for  any  other  possible  errors.   The
applicant asked to meet the SSB and her DOS was changed to  indefinite
for the SSB.  As a side note, the applicant did write a letter to  the
19 Feb  02  board,  stating  that  she  had  withdrawn  her  voluntary
separation and had every intention of remaining on active  duty.   The
applicant met the 6 May 02 SSB and was nonselected  for  promotion  to
major.

AFPC/DPPP stated that in the applicant’s  letter  to  the  19  Feb  02
board, she indicated that she did not enroll in SOS  while  a  younger
captain because she was planning on separating.  She could have  taken
that opportunity to convey to the board why she could not complete  it
in residence.

Regarding the applicant’s  contention  that  her  PRF  was  incorrect,
AFPC/DPPP indicated that the PRF process begins approximately 105 days
prior to the board.  For the 19 Feb 02 major board,  that  would  have
been 6 Nov 01.  At that time, her  duty  history  reflected  her  duty
title as Assistant Flight  Commander,  T-1.   The  applicant  wrote  a
letter to the board stating that at the time the PRF was  written  she
was working as a student assistant flight commander,  thus  validating
what the PRF stated.  If the PRF was in  error,  the  applicant  could
have explained it in her letter to the board.  In addition,  her  duty
history accurately reflected her move to Chief Flight Ops  Support/T-1
IP, effective 26 Nov 01, so the board was aware of her new position.

AFPC/DPPP stated that eligible officers are provided  the  opportunity
to correspond by letter with their board  to  address  any  matter  of
record concerning themselves that they believe is important  to  their
consideration.  The applicant did exercise this  entitlement  but  did
not address any of the  data  she  contends  to  be  relevant  to  her
nonselection.  If she believed that her duty  title  on  the  PRF  and
resident SOS were relevant to the process,  she  could  have  provided
this information in her letter to the board.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPP evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A statement was provided from  the  Commander,  71st  Flying  Training
Wing, the applicant’s senior rater, on her behalf, which  is  attached
at Exhibit H.

Applicant reviewed the  advisory  opinion  and  furnished  a  detailed
response.  She indicated  the  most  compelling  reason  that  she  is
requesting reconsideration is that she sought career  counseling  from
the officer  promotions  section  at  AFPC,  her  former  and  current
squadron and wing  commanders,  and  her  vice  wing  commander.   The
colonels in this  group  have  personnel,  promotion  board,  and  SSB
experience.  Not one person found a reason  that  she  should  not  be
promoted.  Her record is strong.  She was hurt by the presence  of  an
erroneous DOS and has been fighting to recover since that  time.   The
nonselection counselor went as far as to compare  her  record  to  the
bottom five officers selected for promotion and the top five  officers
not selected for promotion.  The counselor felt that her record scored
high enough to be promoted by a central selection board or an SSB.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice.   After  a  thorough  review  of  the
evidence presented, we are sufficiently persuaded that  the  applicant
may not have been fairly and equitably considered for promotion to the
grade of major by the CY02A Central Major Selection Board  because  of
an inaccurate record.  In coming  to  this  conclusion,  we  note  the
following issues:

      a.  The applicant's request for withdrawal of her voluntary  DOS
was not approved prior to the convening of the board.  Because she was
affected by Stop Loss,  it  appears  that  her  record  had  an  AFPC-
generated DOS updated on her OSB.  The  applicant  believes  that  the
erroneous DOS may have caused the board to question her dedication  to
military service.  Her current senior rater, who was a panel president
for the  CY02A  board  supports  her  contention  indicating  that  he
believes that the primary reason for the applicant's nonselection  for
promotion was the erroneous DOS.  While the applicant was subsequently
granted an SSB, but nonselected, by  AFPC  with  her  DOS  changed  to
"indefinite," the senior rater believes that had the  applicant's  DOS
paperwork been processed prior to the original board, she  would  have
been promoted to  major  by  that  board.   Also,  we  note  that  the
applicant was not given an opportunity to review her record  prior  to
the SSB, nor was she afforded nonselection counseling.  The  applicant
asserts that had she been able to review her records, she  would  have
been able to  ensure  the  accuracy  of  her  record  prior  to  being
considered for promotion by the SSB by having  her  duty  history  and
CY02A PRF corrected to reflect the proper duty titles.

      b.  Regarding the applicant's contention that her CY02A PRF  had
an incorrect duty title, we note that her duty title changed prior  to
the convening of the  board.   It  appears  that  the  applicant  made
efforts to have the duty title on the PRF changed to reflect  her  new
duty title prior to the board, however,  she  apparently  was  advised
that this could not be accomplished, although there seems to have been
ample time to do so.

      c.  We further note that the duty title on the applicant's CY02A
OSB, with an effective date of 1 Sep 00, was incorrect.  There  is  no
indication what steps, if any, were taken to correct this error  prior
to the convening of the bboard.

      d.  The applicant's  contentions  regarding  SOS  completion  in
residence vice correspondence are duly noted.

      e.  Lastly, we note that the applicant provided a letter to  the
board explaining the circumstances of the DOS and SOS.

4.  While  it  cannot  be  conclusively  determined  what  impact  the
erroneous DOS and erroneous duty titles on the CY02A OSB and CY02A PRF
may have had on the applicant’s promotion opportunity, in view of  the
totality of the circumstances of this situation and the high  rate  of
promotion to the grade of major, we believe any  doubt  in  this  case
should be resolved in her favor.  Further, her corrected record should
be provided promotion consideration by an SSB.  However,  in  view  of
the corrections to be made, the letter she wrote to the  board  should
also be removed because to do otherwise would defeat  the  purpose  of
correcting her record.  She should  be  provided  the  opportunity  to
write another letter  to  the  board  should  she  choose  to  do  so.
Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant's records be corrected as
set forth 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 Officer Selection Brief (OSB) prepared for consideration
by the Calendar Year 2002A Central Major Selection Board be amended in
the "Service Data" Section to show an "Indefinite" Date of  Separation
(DOS); and, be amended in the “Assignment History” Section to show the
duty title of "Assistant Flight Commander/T-1 Instructor Pilot,”  with
an effective date of  1  Sep  00,  rather  than  "Line/T-1  Instructor
Pilot."

      b.  The  Promotion  Recommendation  Form  (PRF),  AF  Form  709,
prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year  2002A  Central  Major
Selection Board be amended in Section III, Item  1,  to  show  a  duty
title of Chief, Flight Operations Support/T-1, with an effective  date
of 26 Nov 01, rather than "Assistant Flight  Commander/T-1  Instructor
Pilot."

       c.  Her  letter  to  the  Calendar  Year  2002A  Central  Major
Selection Board, dated 12 Feb 02, be declared void  and  removed  from
her records.

It is further recommended that she be considered for promotion to  the
grade of major by a Special Selection  Board  for  the  Calendar  Year
2002A Central Major Selection Board with the corrected OSB and PRF.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02359 in Executive Session on 28 Jan 03, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
      Ms. Diane Arnold, Member
      Mr. Michael Barbino, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Jul 02, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAO, dated 6 Aug 02.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPAP, dated 26 Aug 02.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEB, dated 24 Oct 02.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 5 Nov 02.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Nov 02.
     Exhibit H.  Letter, in applicant's behalf, dated 6 Dec 02.
     Exhibit I.  Letter, applicant, dated 7 Dec 02, w/atch.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR 02-02359




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 , be corrected to show that:

            a.  The Officer Selection Brief (OSB) prepared for
consideration by the Calendar Year 2002A Central Major Selection Board
be amended in the "Service Data" Section to show an "Indefinite" Date
of Separation (DOS); and, be amended in the “Assignment History”
Section to show the duty title of "Assistant Flight Commander/T-1
Instructor Pilot,” with an effective date of 1 Sep 00, rather than
"Line/T-1 Instructor Pilot."

            b.  The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709,
prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year 2002A Central Major
Selection Board be amended in Section III, Item 1, to show a duty
title of Chief, Flight Operations Support/T-1, rather than "Assistant
Flight Commander/T-1 Instructor Pilot."

            c.  Her letter to the Calendar Year 2002A Central Major
Selection Board, dated 12 Feb 02, be, and hereby is, declared void and
removed from her records.

      It is further directed that she be considered for promotion to
the grade of major by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year
2002A Central Major Selection Board with the corrected OSB and PRF.






    JOE G. LINEBERGER

    Director

    Air Force Review Boards Agency