RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00714
            INDEX CODE:  131.01
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for promotion to the grade of colonel by Special  Selection
Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1998A (CY98A) Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Evidence of his successful completion  of  dental  residency  was  not  made
available to selection board  members  that  considered  him  for  promotion
between 1997 and 2001.  He submitted the correction request to his  Military
Personnel Flight (MPF) and was assured the corrections were made.  For  each
of the boards from 1998 to present, he  submitted  a  letter  to  the  board
president  noting  the  discrepancy  in  his  record.   He   discussed   his
nonselection with his current command surgeon who stated that he sat on  his
previous SSB panel and knew of his residency training  and  noted  that  his
record did not reflect the  additional  training.   In  addition,  his  OSBs
contained the wrong code for his dental school.   They  reflected  7BAY  and
should have reflected 7BYY.

In support of his  request,  applicant  provided  a  personal  statement,  a
statement from his command surgeon, copies of documents retrieved  from  the
AFPC web site, and his Calendar Year 2001A OSB.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a captain, Reserve of the Air Force, on  26  Jan  82
and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on that same  date.   He
was progressively promoted  to  the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel,  having
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 18 Dec 93.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of colonel  by
the CY98A (9 Nov 98), CY99A (8 Nov 99), CY00A (6  Nov  00),  CY01A  (22  Oct
01), and the CY02A (28 Oct 02) Central Colonel Selection Boards.  On 28  Aug
00, he was considered by SSB for the CY98A board, and was not selected.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAMF2 states that although the documents  provided  by  the  applicant
are not selection briefs, only the document dated  10 Sep  01  is  truly  an
Officer Preselection Brief (OPB).  The 10 Sep  01,  OPB  reflects  data  has
been updated and in the system on 10 Sep 01.  The DPAMF2  evaluation  is  at
Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied on the basis of  timeliness.
 If the Board decides to consider the case on  its  merit,  then  denial  is
recommended.  The applicant contends he was not aware of the absence of  his
residency training until October 2000.  However, the applicant  received  an
OPB 90-100 days prior to the convening of each  selection  board.   The  OPB
contains data that appears on the OSB at the central board.   He  failed  to
ensure the OSBs were corrected.  The proper  recourse  would  have  been  to
write a letter to the board,  which  he  did,  but  failed  to  mention  his
completion  of  his  dental  residency  training.   Therefore,  he  did  not
exercise reasonable diligence to ensure his record  was  accurate  prior  to
these boards.  Additionally, although the OSBs for the 1998, 1999, and  2000
board did not reflect his dental residency  training,  his  training  report
closing 24 Jun 95, which was filed in his Officer  Selection  Record  (OSR),
did  show  his  completion  of  "Advanced   Clinical   Dentistry   Program."
Therefore, board members had knowledge of this accomplishment.  There is  no
clear evidence that the inaccurate OSBs negatively  impacted  his  promotion
opportunity.  Central  boards  evaluate  the  entire  OSR,  assessing  whole
person factors such as job performance, professional  qualities,  depth  and
breadth of experience, leadership, and academic  and  professional  military
education.  Therefore,  SSB  consideration  is  not  warranted.   The  DPPPO
evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that he is only requesting SSB consideration for the  CY98A
board.   He  was  discouraged  from  writing  a   letter   to   that   board
differentiating  the  increased  responsibility  of  his  flight   commander
position at Little Rock AFB as compared  to  the  prior  squadron  commander
position at Columbus AFB.  He was told that any letter  was  unnecessary  as
the board members would know the  difference  without  intervention  on  his
part.  Review  of  board  results  by  AFPC  personnel  concluded  that  his
nonselection was likely due to the board perception that he did not  perform
well as a squadron commander  and  was  not  selected  for  another  command
position.  In actuality, the new assignment as  a  flight  commander  was  a
reward for a job well done, not retribution for poor performance.  The  duty
title of Flight  Commander  is  a  lower  position  on  the  hierarchy  than
squadron commander.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement,  letters
in support of his appeal, copies of documentation previously submitted,  and
officer SURFs.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO states that if the applicant had exercised  proper  care  of  his
records prior to  the  CY98A  board,  he  would  have  discovered  that  the
residency training was not recorded  on  the  OSB.   The  applicant  clearly
failed to exercise reasonable diligence to correct his records  until  after
he was identified as a nonselect for promotion,  as  evidenced  by  his  own
written statement.  He maintains that immediate action was taken to  address
the incorrect/missing information but he provides  no  evidence  to  support
his claim.  The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant's response to the  additional  advisory  opinion  is  attached  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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of error or  injustice  warranting  SSB  consideration.   We  took
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits  of  the
case; however, we are not persuaded by the evidence presented  that  he  has
substantiated  that  his  completion  of  dental  residency  was  not   made
available to the selection board members  nor  are  we  persuaded  that  the
absence of his residency training on the OSBs had a negative impact  on  his
promotion opportunity.  We agree with  the  Air  Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility that it appears he did not exercise due diligence  to  ensure
his selection records were accurate prior to promotion consideration and  we
adopt their rationale as the basis for our  conclusion  that  the  applicant
has not been the victim of  an  error  or  injustice.   In  the  absence  of
evidence to the contrary, the Board finds 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 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  BC-2003-
00714 in Executive Session on 14 Oct 03, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
      Mr. Robert H. Altman, Member
      Mr. Albert Ellett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAMF2, dated 14 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 28 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jun 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 28 Jun 03.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, not dated.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 25 Sep 03.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Oct 03.




                                   JOHN L. ROBUCK
                                   Panel Chair