RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00891
            INDEX CODE:  131.09

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be directly promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel as  though
selected with her promotion year group.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was denied the opportunity to  develop  a  record  of  performance
during her Air Force career that would support any fair  consideration
for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel.

In  support  of  her  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, a talking paper, letters from her  senior  raters,  officer
performance reports(OPRs), and other  documents  associated  with  the
matter under review.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
major, having been promoted to that grade  on  1 Sep  88.   Her  Total
Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 18 Mar 79.

On 24 May 89, the Board considered an application  pertaining  to  the
applicant, requesting that  her  Officer  Effectiveness  Report  (OER)
closing 31 Jan 85 be removed from her records.  The Board  recommended
that the contested report  be  declared  void  and  removed  from  her
records and she be considered for promotion to the grade of  major  by
Special Selection  Boards  for  the  Calendar  Year  1987  (CY87)  and
Calendar Year 1988 (CY88) Major Boards.   The  Deputy  for  Air  Force
Review Boards accepted the Board’s recommendation  on  9  Jun  89.   A
complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit C.

On  12  May  92,  the  Board  considered  and  denied  an  application
pertaining to the applicant, requesting that she be returned to
active duty and promoted to the grade of major.  A  complete  copy  of
the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit D.

On 2 Dec 94, the applicant requested reconsideration  of  her  appeal.
Specifically, she requested a direct promotion to the grade  of  major
with an equivalent date of rank (DOR) as though selected by  the  CY87
Major Board; reinstatement to active duty; and direct promotion to the
grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  with  a  DOR  commensurate  with   her
established DOR to the grade of major.

On 7 Mar 95, the Board considered and recommended partial relief. They
recommended that her records be corrected to show that:

      a.    She was tendered a Regular Air Force appointment and  upon
Senate confirmation, she accepted the  appointment,  effective  18 Dec
85.

      b.    She was considered and selected for promotion to the grade
of major by the CY87 Central Major Selection  Board  and  upon  Senate
confirmation, she be given an appropriate effective date and  date  of
rank.

      c.    The OER, AF Form 707, rendered for the period  18  Dec  86
through 17 Dec 87, be declared void and removed from her records.

      d.     She  was  not  released  from  extended  active  duty  on
31 Jan 89, but continued on  extended  active  duty  and  was  ordered
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) to her home of record.

It was further recommended that if she was considered and  nonselected
for promotion to the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  by  a  regularly
scheduled promotion board prior to receiving two current OPRs  in  the
grade of major, her nonselection(s) would be declared void.

The  Deputy  for  Air  Force  Review  Boards  accepted   the   Board’s
recommendation on 15 May 95.  A  complete  copy  of  the  Addendum  to
Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit E.

On 24 Mar 97, the applicant again submitted  additional  documentation
and requested that an OER be included in her records.  On 16  May  97,
the Board considered her request and recommended that an  OER  closing
17 Dec 97 be inserted in her records  in  its  proper  sequence.   The
Director,  Air  Force  Review  Boards  Agency,  accepted  the  Board’s
recommendation on 29 Jul 97.  A complete copy of the  Second  Addendum
to Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit F.

Applicant's OPR profile since 1996 follows:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION

      31 May 96              Meets Standards
      31 May 97              Meets Standards
      31 May 98              Meets Standards
  # 31 May 99                Meets Standards
 ## 31 May 00                Meets Standards
### 31 May 01                Meets Standards

  # Top Report at the time she  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the  CY99A  and  CY99B
Lieutenant Colonel Boards.

 ## Top Report at the time she  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the  CY00A  Lieutenant
Colonel Board.

### Top Report at the time she  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the  CY01A  Lieutenant
Colonel Board.

The remaining  relevant  facts  pertaining  to  this  application  are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the  Air
Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial.  They noted  that  as  a  result  of  a
detrimental OER with a close out date of 31 Jan 85, the applicant  was
twice  nonselected  to  the  grade  of  major  and  was   subsequently
involuntarily separated.  From 1985 to 1989, she sought correction  of
that OER, and  on  24 Jan  89,  the  AFBCMR  granted  removal  of  the
contested OER from her records.  She was  considered  by  the  Nov  89
Special Selection Board (SSB) and again  nonselected.   The  applicant
appealed several times through the AFBCMR to  be  returned  to  active
duty and be promoted to the grade of major, with unsuccessful results.
 On 15 May 95, the AFBCMR directed that her record be corrected,  that
she be returned to active duty, that she be promoted to major  with  a
date of rank of 1 Sep 88, and that she not be  considered  nonselected
for promotion to lieutenant colonel until she had received two officer
promotion reports (OPRs) as a major.

Upon her return to active duty, she was assigned to a job outside  her
career field and was eventually reassigned to  an  Air  Force  Reserve
Officers Training Corps (AFROTC) detachment.   While  working  at  the
detachment,  she  discovered  numerous  AFROTC  violations  and   felt
compelled to report them to her superiors.  As a  consequence  of  the
investigations, the detachment commander was relieved of  his  duties,
but prior to his removal he wrote her second OPR.  She met the  P0599A
and P0599B boards and was nonselected.

According to AFPC/DPPPO, the Air Force has many officers  who,  for  a
variety of reasons, do not follow a  typical  career  path.   Many  of
these officers progress  and  do  very  well  when  meeting  promotion
boards.  Promoting the applicant outright would  be  an  injustice  to
other officers who have had a break in service and  are  not  afforded
direct promotion.  Her situation is no more unique than those officers
recalled  to  active  duty  with  breaks  in   service,   interservice
transfers, and transfers from the Air Force Reserve or  Guard.   They,
too, have incomplete records and lack the breadth and depth that their
peers have.  While it is unfortunate  the  applicant  was  not  in  an
active duty status for nearly seven  years,  the  AFBCMR  has  already
provided a way for her to establish  a  record  of  performance  as  a
major.  She states, “I was faced with the impossible task of  building
a competitive record for promotion to lieutenant colonel in  only  two
years, after an almost seven-year  break  in  service.   The  AFBCMR’s
15 Mar 95 decision provided a way for the  applicant  to  establish  a
record of performance as a major--she  was  not  to  be  considered  a
nonselect for promotion to lieutenant colonel until she  had  received
two OPRs as a major.  Granting her a direct  promotion  to  lieutenant
colonel would ignore the basic principle  of  the  promotion  system--
promotions are based on demonstrated potential based on the record  of
performance.

AFPC/DPPPO indicated that both Congress  and  the  Department  of  the
Defense (DOD) have made  clear  their  intent  that  when  errors  are
perceived to ultimately affect promotion, they should be addressed and
resolved through the  use  of  SSBs.   When  many  good  officers  are
competing  for  a  limited  number  of  promotions,  it  is  extremely
competitive.  Without access to  all  the  competing  records  and  an
appreciation of their content, they continue to believe  the  practice
of sending cases to SSBs is the fairest and  best  practice.   In  the
past, and hopefully in the future, the  AFBCMR  will  consider  direct
promotion only in the most extraordinary circumstances.

AFPC/DPPPO noted that although the applicant wrote  a  letter  to  the
P0599A board informing them of her unique situation in the Air  Force,
and she wrote another letter to the PO500A board  explaining  in  more
detail the circumstances as to why her record  looked  different  than
the others, she was nonselected to the grade of lieutenant colonel.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPO evaluation, with attachments, is  at
Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In her response, the applicant  indicated  that  she  was  denied  the
opportunities to prove her promotion and  career  potential.   In  her
view, the objective  of  promotion  boards  and  SSBs  is  to  promote
officers based on a set standard of rules based on promotion potential
as proven by job performance and other criteria.  She stated that  she
was denied the opportunity to  develop  a  record  of  performance  to
demonstrate her promotion potential and it is only the AFBCMR that can
correct her record and the injustice that has occurred.  According  to
the applicant, AFPC/DPPPO’s recommendation that her appeal  be  denied
is premised on a misunderstanding of the facts of her case in light of
the applicable legal and regulatory standards.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is 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.   The  applicant's  complete
submission was thoroughly  reviewed  and  her  contentions  were  duly
noted.  However, we do not find the  applicant’s  assertions  and  the
documentation  provided  in  support  of   her   appeal   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force  office
of primary responsibility (OPR).  We took note of the Board’s previous
actions to promote the applicant to the grade of major, return her  to
active duty, correct her records, and set aside any nonselections  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel prior  her  to  receiving
two current officer performance reports.  After a thorough  review  of
the facts and circumstances  of  this  case,  we  believe  the  relief
afforded by the Board has provided the  applicant  an  opportunity  to
compete for promotion on a fair and equitable  basis.   The  applicant
does not agree and now requests  direct  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel.   However,  we  note  that  officers  compete  for
promotion under the whole person  concept  whereby  many  factors  are
carefully assessed by selection boards.  In addition, an  officer  may
be qualified, but in the judgment of a  selection  board--vested  with
discretionary authority to make the selections--may not  be  the  best
qualified of those available  for  the  limited  number  of  promotion
vacancies.  Promotion to the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  is  very
competitive and the applicant has  not  provided  persuasive  evidence
that she would have been selected for promotion had it not been for an
interruption  in  her   career.    We   understand   the   applicant’s
disappointment in not being selected for promotion.  However, based on
the documentation before us, we find no basis to promote the applicant
through the correction of records process.  In view of the  foregoing,
in the absence of sufficient evidence to the contrary, we  agree  with
the recommendation of the OPR and adopt their rationale as  the  basis
for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain  her  burden
of establishing that she has suffered either an error or an injustice.
 Accordingly, we find 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 02-
00891 in Executive Session on 17 Sep 02, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
      Mr. Billy C. Baxter, Member
      Mr. Clarence D. Long III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Feb 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, dated
                9 Jun 89, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Record of Proceedings, dated 1 Jul 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, dated
                15 May 95, w/atch.
    Exhibit F.  Memorandum for the Chief of Staff, dated
                29 Jul 97, w/atch.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 17 May 02.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jun 02.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, applicant, dated 5 Jul 02, w/atch.



                                   OLGA M. CRERAR
                                   Panel Chair