RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01817
            INDEX CODE:  131.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was identified by the  major  selection  board  as  a  candidate  for  in
residence Intermediate Service School (ISS).  At the time he  was  stationed
at the Air Force Academy and he was  not  submitted  to  the  ISS  selection
board.  After a permanent change of station (PCS) move to Whiteman AFB,  MO,
he was told that he would not be submitted for ISS because he did  not  have
enough time on station.  The following year, which was his third  and  final
year of eligibility, he was not selected by the ISS board.   He  later  read
an Air Force  Times  article  that  stated  that  the  board  was  selecting
officers  in  their  first  or  second  year  of   eligibility   only.    He
subsequently  completed  Air   Command   and   Staff   College   (ACSC)   by
correspondence.  His performance  reports  were  all  positive  and  he  was
assured by his supervisors that he would be promoted to lieutenant  colonel.
 However, he was not selected.  He requested a review  of  his  records  and
was told that there was nothing in his records that would  indicate  why  he
was not promoted.   The  following  board,  he  was  again  assured  by  his
supervisors that he would be promoted and again he was not selected.

He feels that he was unfairly prevented from competing for in-residence  ISS
which would  have  significantly  enhanced  his  promotion  potential.   His
selection as a candidate for ISS  indicates  that  he  was  in  the  top  20
percent for the major's board.  The applicant questions  how  he  ranked  in
the top 20 percent in the major selection board and fell to  the  bottom  20
percent of the lieutenant  colonel  selection  board  without  any  negative
feedback or documentation of nonperformance.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the  grade  of
major.  He was considered and not selected for promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel  by  the  Calendar  Year  2000A  (CY00A)  and  the  CY01B
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards that convened on 28 Nov  00  and  5  Nov
01, respectively. He currently has a projected date of separation of 31  May
05.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAP reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.   DPAP  states
that the senior raters at the Air Force Academy and Whiteman  AFB  were  not
obligated to nominate  the  applicant  to  compete  at  his  first  two  ISS
selection boards.  His year of eligibility did not  eliminate  him  for  due
consideration of ISS  selection  during  the  third  ISS  central  selection
board.  In fact, ISS board panel members were instructed to  pay  particular
attention to nominees in there last  year  of  eligibility;  these  nominees
were also scored first when the board convened.  The DPAP evaluation  is  at
Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO  reviewed  applicant's  request  and  recommends  denial.   DPPPO
states that both Congress and 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 Special Selection  Boards  (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 for their content, the  practice  of  sending  cases  to
SSBs is the fairest and best practice.   Direct  promotion  should  only  be
considered in the most extraordinary circumstances where  SSB  consideration
has been deemed to be totally  unworkable.   The  applicant's  case  clearly
does not warrant direct promotion.  The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  the  applicant  on  4
Oct 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  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.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  It  is
our opinion that although the applicant was identified as an ISS  candidate,
that selection in itself, does not  guarantee  him  in-residence  attendance
nor did it obligate his  senior  raters  to  nominate  him  to  compete  for
attendance during his first two years of eligibility.  We are not  persuaded
by  the  evidence  submitted  that  he  was  not  provided  full  and   fair
consideration by the ISS Central Selection Board that considered him in  his
third  year  of  eligibility.   Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  persuasive
evidence to the contrary, 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  Docket  Number  02-01817  in
Executive Session on 20 Nov 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
      Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Member

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 May 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAP, dated 18 Jun 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 25 Sep 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Oct 02.




                             MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                             Panel Chair