RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03540
            INDEX CODE:  131.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Correction be made to his duty title and organization on  his  Officer
Selection Brief (OSB) for CY01B Lieutenant Colonel  Central  Selection
Board and he be consideration for promotion  by  a  Special  Selection
Board (SSB) for the CY01B selection board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Even after his personal attention and  the  assurances  of  others  to
correct the record,  his  OSB  reflected  the  wrong  duty  title  and
organization.  He believes that this omission  denied  the  board  the
opportunity to see his upward  movement  in  the  Wing  structure  and
therefore proved detrimental to his promotion opportunity.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

He is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of major.
 He was assigned to the 3rd Operations Group as Chief, Fighter Branch,
Group Standardization and Evaluation Division, at Elmendorf  AFB,  AK,
on 5 June 2001.  The duty title reflected  on  the  OSB  was  that  of
Assistant Operations Officer.

He was considered and not selected  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by the CY00A and CY01B selection boards.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAO states that the applicant’s CY01 Lieutenant Colonel  Central
Selection Board Officer Selection Brief did  display  inaccurate  duty
history information when it met the board.   DPAO  confirms  that  the
applicant’s  duty  history  has  been  corrected   and   verified   by
AFPC/DPAOC.   DPAO  defers  to  AFPC/DPPPO’s  decision  regarding  the
applicant being considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB).

AFPC/DPAO evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial.  DPPPO  recognizes  the  fact  that  the
applicant’s OSB did not reflect his correct duty title but  they  note
that the correct duty title was listed on  the  applicant’s  Promotion
Recommendation Form (PRF) and states their belief that the  board  was
able to distinguish the difference between duty information on the OSB
and duty information on the PRF.

DPPPO maintains that because the board considers whole person  factors
such as job performance, professional qualities, depth and breadth  of
experience,  leadership,  and  academic  and   professional   military
education they  are  not  convinced  that  the  erroneous  duty  title
contributed to the applicant’s nonselection for promotion.

AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant contends that DPPPO’s statement  that  there  was  no  clear
evidence that the omission of the applicant’s duty title from his  OSB
negatively impacted his chances for promotion  is  flawed.   Applicant
takes issue with DPPPO’s contention that  board  members  should  have
been able to distinguish between the incorrect information on the  OSB
and the correct information on the PRF by stating that  it’s  entirely
possible that the board looked at the discrepancy in a negative  light
as if the applicant’s attention to detail  was  defective.   Applicant
feels that the board was more  likely  to  focus  on  the  more  “user
friendly” duty history column and  conclude  that  the  applicant  had
stagnated in the same position for over two years.

Applicant contends that while he  made  every  endeavor  to  have  the
discrepancy corrected prior to the board, his efforts were for naught.
 Applicant’s argument  is  that  an  inaccurate  OSB  could  not  have
enhanced his chances at  being  selected  for  promotion  rather  than
DPPPO’s contention that it did not have any impact at all.

Applicant concludes that the  OSB  presented  to  the  board  did  not
reflect an important career achievement.  For DPPPO to assume that the
board could differentiate between the  two  duty  titles  in  the  few
seconds they had to review each record was to deny  the  applicant  an
equal opportunity to compete with his peers.

Applicant's complete response 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 timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error  or  injustice.   After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
complete case file, the Board noted that while the applicant's  Promotion
Recommendation Form reflected the correct duty title and organization  as
"Chief, Fighter Branch, Group Standardization and  Evaluation  Division",
his Officer Selection Brief did not reflect his correct  duty  title  and
organization.   While  the  Board  cannot  determine  what  impact  these
omissions would have had on the outcome of the CY01B  Lieutenant  Colonel
Selection Board, the Board is persuaded that they deprived  him  of  full
and fair consideration.  In view of the foregoing and  in  an  effort  to
remove any possibility of an injustice to  the  applicant,  we  recommend
that his record be corrected in the following manner.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Officer Selection Brief  prepared
for the Calendar Year 2001  (CYO1B)  Lieutenant  Colonel  Central  Selection
board be amended to reflect his proper duty title entry of  “Chief,  Fighter
Branch,  Group  Standardization  and  Evaluation   Division”   rather   than
“Assistant Operations Officer” effective 5 June 2001.

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to  the  grade
of lieutenant colonel by Special  Selection  Board  for  the  CY01B  Central
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-03540 in Executive Session on 23 April 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Panel Chair
      Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Oct 02, w/atch’s.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAO, dated 18 Nov 02, W/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ/AFPC/DPPPO, dated 22 Jan 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Feb 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant Rebuttal, dated 25 Feb 03.



                                   CHARLES E. BENNETT
                                   Panel Chair
BC-2002-03540






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 his Officer Selection
Brief, prepared for consideration by CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Central
Selection Board, be corrected to reflect a duty title of "Chief, Fighter
Branch, Group Standardization and Evaluation Division," rather than
“Assistant Operations Officer” effective 5 June 2001: and, he be considered
for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board
for the CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board.







  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency