RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01692
                               (Case 2)
            INDEX CODE:  131.00, 131.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  27 November 2006
_________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a
Special Selection  Board  (SSB)  for  the  CY02B  (12  November  2002)
Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, with his corrected Officer
Performance Report (OPR), closing 22 April 2002, showing  a  Duty  Air
Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) of 51J4 vice 51J3.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The incorrect DAFSC of 51J3 indicated he was assigned to a  base-level
office rather than  a  numbered  Air  Force-level  organization.   The
promotion board members could have  been  easily  confused  about  the
level of office to which he was assigned since, at  one  time,  Nellis
AFB had two legal offices - one for base level operations and one  for
numbered Air Force type issues.

In support of his request, applicant submits copies of the  Evaluation
Report Appeal Board (ERAB) decision, with the corrected OPR,  and  his
ERAB application package.  The applicant’s complete  submission,  with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is
10 August 1988.  He is currently serving on active duty in  the  grade
of major, with an effective date and date of rank of 1 September 1996.
 The following is a resume  of  his  OPR  ratings  subsequent  to  his
promotion to that grade.

            Period Ending    Evaluation

                22 Apr 97    Meets Standards (MS)
                22 Apr 98         MS
                22 Apr 99         MS
            #   22 Apr 00         MS
            ##  22 Apr 01         MS
            ### 22 Apr 02         MS
                22 Apr 03         MS
            ####22 Apr 04         MS

# Top report at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to  lieutenant  colonel  by  the  CY00A  Lieutenant  Colonel
(LtCol) Central Selection Board (CSB), which convened  on  28 November
2000.

## Top report at the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY01B LtCol CSB, which convened
on 5 November 2001.

### Top report at the time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY02B LtCol CSB, which convened
on 12 November 2002.

#### Top report at the time he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY04J LtCol CSB, which convened
on 5 December 2004.

The applicant’s appeal to the Evaluation Report Appeal  Board  (ERAB),
under Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2401, requesting the DAFSC on his
22 April 2002 OPR be corrected to reflect 51J4 was approved;  however,
his request for SSB consideration was disapproved.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied.  DPPPO states that
the contested DAFSC is correctly reflected on the  applicant’s  P0502B
Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) and Officer Selection Brief (OSB).
 Therefore, the board members did in fact have knowledge to the  level
of office in which the applicant was assigned.  As such, the corrected
DAFSC on his 22 April 2002 OPR does not introduce any new  information
that was not already considered by the original board.  The  applicant
did not provide any documentation showing he attempted to correct  the
22 April 2002 OPR prior to convening of the  board.   DPPPO  does  not
believe a material error  or  injustice  existed  in  the  applicant’s
record when it met the  P0502B  selection  board.  The  HQ  AFPC/DPPPO
evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory  opinion  and  strongly  disagrees
that the error in his OPR was not  material  in  nature  and  that  he
failed to exercise due diligence.  It is undisputed  that  the  record
considered by the selection board  contained  conflicting  information
about his most recent duty assignment.  He was provided a copy of  his
preselection brief on approximately  26  June  2002  and  the  OPR  in
question was not signed by its reviewer until 25 June 2002.  Thus,  it
is extremely unlikely that the report was in his official  records  at
the Military  Personnel  Flight  at  the  time  he  was  provided  the
preselection brief for review.  The applicant’s  complete  submission,
with attachment, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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  reviewing  applicant’s
submission and the evidence of record, we noted that the requested OPR
correction;  i.e.,  Duty  Air  Force  Specialty  Code   (DAFSC),   was
accurately reflected on his P0502B Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF)
and Officer Selection Brief (OSB), which were contained in his Officer
Selection Record.  Since selection boards evaluate the entire  officer
record, applicant’s DAFSC was available for review on the PRF and  OSB
when he was considered for promotion by the CY02B  (P0502B)  selection
board.  Additionally, the unit mission description on the  OPR  itself
indicates the office level is above a wing office.   In  view  of  the
above, we believe  the  documents  seen  by  the  selection  board  in
question  were  substantially  complete  and  accurate,   and   fairly
portrayed  the  applicant’s  record.   Accordingly,  the   applicant’s
request is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 28 July 2005, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                  Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in  connection  with
AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2005-01692.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 May 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 14 Jun 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 05.
   Exhibit E.  Letter from Applicant, dated 22 Jun 05, w/atch.




                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                   Panel Chair