ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  97-02572

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES



RESUME OF CASE:

On 12 February 1998, the Board  considered  applicant’s  requests  that  his
nonselections for promotion  to  the  grade  of  major  beginning  with  the
Calendar Year 1993 (CY93) Central Major  Board  be  declared  void  and  his
records be corrected to reflect selection for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
major by the CY93  board  and  continuous  active  duty  service  since  his
separation, with restoration of all back  pay  and  allowances,  to  include
carryover of the maximum amount of leave for the period of leave he was  not
on active  duty.   The  Board  found  sufficient  evidence  to  warrant  the
applicant’s reinstatement to active  duty.   However,  the  Board  found  no
evidence of an error or injustice to warrant reinstatement of accrued  leave
in excess of 60 days (Exhibits A through C).

In a  letter,  dated  31  March  1999,  the  applicant  provided  additional
evidence and requests his records be corrected to reflect promotion  to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel as if selected by the  CY99  Central  Lieutenant
Colonel Selection Board (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Appeals and SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed the application  and
states that according to MPF Memorandum 98-47, dated  7 December  1998,  the
applicant should have received a Directed by Headquarters Air Force  OPR  if
he did not have an OPR or Training Report  (TR)  in  his  Officer  Selection
Record (OSR) documenting accomplishments since his return  to  active  duty.
In the applicant’s case, his OSR contained a  TR,  closing  31  March  1999,
reflecting the grade of major.  In addition, the applicant  wrote  a  letter
to the CY99A board  explaining  the  reason  he  did  not  have  performance
reports in his OSR reflecting his current grade of  major.   Therefore,  the
board was aware of his accomplishments  as  a  major  since  his  return  to
active duty in July 1998 and why his OSR did  not  contain  OPRs  reflecting
his grade  of  major.   As  such,  neither  Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)
consideration or direct promotion is warranted.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and  states  that,  contrary
to the Air Force’s opinion, his situation does fall into the category of  an
extreme case warranting a  change  in  the  board  results.   The  four-year
performance void as a major did not allow the central board to evaluate  his
promotion potential with his peers.  For his first promotion  consideration,
he had only one  document  as  a  major  (PRF)  for  the  board  to  review.
However, the PRF was flawed  because  the  void  in  his  records  virtually
eliminated any opportunity for him  to  fairly  compete  for  a  “Definitely
Promote” recommendation.  For his second  consideration,  he  had  only  two
documents written on him as a major (PRF  &  OPR  covering  64-day  period).
The TR did little if anything to fill that void.  While his  letter  to  the
board president did explain why he had a four-year  gap,  it  did  not  help
fill the void.  As noted by his senior rater,  an  alternative  to  directly
promoting him would be to set aside his  non-selections  and  allow  him  to
compete in the next cycle as an in-the-promotion-zone (IPZ) consideree.

The applicant cites a previous  AFBCMR  case  (95-03399)  in  which  another
major had a three to four year void on the top of his record and  the  Board
directed his promotion.

In further support of the appeal,  applicant  submits  statements  from  his
senior raters and briefing charts from the CY99 board.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of a probable error or injustice  to  warrant  setting  aside  the
applicant’s nonselections for promotion and allowing him to compete  IPZ  by
the Calendar Year 2000A (CY00A) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection  Board.
 As a result of previous Board actions,  the  applicant  was  reinstated  to
active duty and selected for promotion to the grade of major by an  SSB  for
the CY93 board.  He was considered IPZ and nonselected for promotion to  the
grade of lieutenant by the CY99A  board.   However,  at  the  time  of  this
consideration, the only documents in his OSR reflecting his grade  of  major
were a TR and PRF.   His  OSR  did  not  contain  any  OPRs.   He  was  also
considered by the CY99B board with only two documents written on  him  as  a
major (PRF & OPR covering a  64-day  period).   In  support  of  applicant’s
request the senior raters  during  the  period  in  question  have  provided
statements indicating that, given the absence of  a  sufficient  performance
record, he was denied an opportunity to compete for a  “Definitely  Promote”
recommendation and IPZ  consideration  to  lieutenant  colonel.   The  CY99A
senior rater recommends that the applicant’s  nonselections  be  set  aside;
thereby, making him eligible for the CY00A Lt Col promotion board as an  IPZ
candidate.  We agree.  While it cannot be  conclusively  determined  whether
or not the absence of OPRs reflecting his performance as  a  major  was  the
sole reason for his nonselections, we do believe that it served  to  deprive
him of fair and equitable  consideration.   In  view  of  this  finding  and
noting the supporting statements from the applicant’s rating  officials,  we
recommend that his nonselections be set aside and that he be considered  IPZ
by SSB for the CY00A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

2.    We noted applicant’s request  for  direct  promotion  by  this  Board.
However, we believe that  a  duly  constituted  SSB  applying  the  complete
promotion criteria is in the  most  advantageous  position  to  render  this
vital determination; and, that its prerogative  to  do  so  should  only  be
usurped under extraordinary circumstances.

3.    The applicant's case is adequately documented  and  it  has  not  been
shown that a personal appearance with or  without  counsel  will  materially
add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved.  Therefore,  the  request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was not considered for  promotion
to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the Calendar  Years  1999A  and  1999B
Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.

It is further recommended that he be considered by Special  Selection  Board
for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel beginning with the  CY2000A
Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________






The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 8 November 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-2602:

                  Mr. Benedict A. Kausal, IV, Chair
                  Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Member
              Mr. Gregory H. Petkoff, Member
                  Mr. Phillip E. Horton, Examiner (without vote)

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

   Exhibits A - C.  Record of Proceedings, dated 6 Mar 98,
                        w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 31 Mar 99, w/atchs.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, date27 Sep 99, w/atchs.
       Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MIBR.
       Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 29 May 00, w/atchs.





                                   BENEDICT A. KAUSAL, IV
                                   Chair