RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01373

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His duty history on the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) and duty title on  the
Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for  the  Calendar  Year  2001B
(CY01B) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board  (P0501B)  be  corrected,
and his corrected record  be  considered  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY01B board.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to incorrect data on his Officer Performance  Report  (OPR),  closing  8
September 2001, his PRF and duty history were incorrect when  considered  by
the P0501B board.

The applicant states that he departed PCS  on  16  July  2001  and  did  not
receive a copy of his OPR and PRF until two weeks  after  the  P0501B  board
convened.  His supervisor departed prior to the closeout date  of  his  OPR.
The reason for the report was a change in reporting official  (CRO),  rather
than annual, and the closeout date of the report should have  been  16  June
2001.  As a result, the wrong duty title appeared on the  PRF  prepared  for
the P0501B board and wrong duty history on the OSB.

In support of the appeal, the applicant  submits  copies  of  his  Permanent
Change of Station (PCS) orders, travel voucher, contested OPR and  PRF,  and
a letter stating receipt of PRF on 20 November 2001.

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

_________________________________________________________________






STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade  of
lieutenant colonel by the CY99B, CY00A, CY01B (P0501B), and CY02B  selection
boards.  The PRF prepared for the P0501B board  listed  his  duty  title  as
Strategic Planning Officer and the OSB listed  his  duty  title  as  Special
Tactics  Liason  (sic),  effective  1  August  2001.   The  OPR,  closing  8
September 2001, listed his duty title as Chief, Wargaming Branch.

In a letter, dated 12 May 2003, he was notified that the  Evaluation  Report
Appeals Board (ERAB) favorably considered his request that the OPR,  closing
8 September 2001, should be corrected to reflect a closing date of  16  June
2001 and a reason for the report  of  CRO.   As  a  result,  the  ERAB  also
changed the from date of the 19 July 2002 report to  reflect  17  June  2001
and a new closing date of 16 June 2002, and the reason  for  the  report  to
annual.  His Officer Selection Record (OSR) was also corrected.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
the applicant does not state what  action  he  took  when  he  received  his
Officer Pre-selection  Brief  (OPB)  to  ensure  his  duty  information  was
accurate prior to the preparation of his PRF.  He also does not  state  what
actions he took prior to the board to  retrieve  a  copy  of  his  PRF.   In
addition, he does not provide  the  required  senior  rater  and  management
level review (MLR) president support or a revised  PRF  with  the  corrected
duty title.

The AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied and states,  in  part,  that
the changes to the applicant’s OPRs are considered minor/administrative  and
do not warrant  SSB  consideration.   Furthermore,  the  correction  to  the
closing date of the OPR closing 8 September 2001 had no bearing on the  duty
title effective 9  September  2000.   The  Military  Personnel  Data  System
(MilPDS) erroneously reflected his duty title entry with an  effective  date
of 8 September 2000, rather than 9 September 2000.  As  such,  they  suggest
he  contact  his  Military  Personnel  Flight  (MPF)  for  updating  of  the
corrective effective date for the duty title  entry.   AFPC/DPPPO  does  not
recommend  SSB  consideration  since  he  did  not  demonstrate   reasonable
diligence in correcting the errors prior to the P0501B board convening.

The AFPC/DPPPO evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Complete  copies  of  the  Air  Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 11 July 2003 for review and response within 30 days.   However,
as of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 a thorough review  of  the  evidence
of record and applicant’s submission,  we  are  not  persuaded  that  relief
should be granted.  In this respect, we note that the  corrections  made  to
his OPRs are considered minor  and  administrative.   As  such,  we  do  not
believe they warrant SSB consideration.   In  addition,  he  has  failed  to
provide any  support  from  the  senior  rater  of  the  contested  PRF  and
Management Level Review (MLR) president.  Applicant’s contentions  are  duly
noted; however, we do not find  these  assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,
sufficiently persuasive to  override  the  rationale  provided  by  the  Air
Force.  The offices of  primary  responsibility  have  adequately  addressed
applicant’s contentions and we agree  with  their  opinions  and  adopt  the
rationale expressed as the basis for our decision  that  the  applicant  has
failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered  either  an  error  or  an
injustice.  Hence, we find no compelling basis  to  recommend  granting  the
relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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  Docket  Number  BC-2003-01229
in Executive Session on 23 September 2003, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
                       Mr. James W. Russell, III, Member
                       Mr. Jay H. Jordon, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 6 Jun 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 1 Jul 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jul 03.




                                   JOHN L. ROBUCK
                                   Panel Chair