RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02093
            INDEX CODE:  131.09

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

As a Reserve officer, he was unfairly  discriminated  against  by  the
Calendar Year  2001B  (CY01B)  Central  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selection
Board.

Because he was considered by  the  CY01B  Central  Lieutenant  Colonel
Selection Board with an erroneous record (missing Officer  Performance
Report  (OPR),  he  was  granted   Special   Selection   Board   (SSB)
consideration.  He is awaiting the results  of  the  SSB  but  is  not
hopeful because he believes that the problem of Reserve discrimination
is a systemic one affecting all boards.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provided  an   expanded
statement, copies of his CY01B PRF, a letter from  his  senior  rater,
his letters to the board, his  Freedom  of  Information  Act  requests
(FOIA), a electronic  mail  (e-mail)  concerning  the  Intra-Component
Transfer Program,  and  two  supportive  statements  from  his  former
supervisor and commander.

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 May  96.   His  Total
Active  Federal  Military  Service  Date  (TAFMSD)  and  Total  Active
Commissioned Service Date (TACSD) is 8 Feb 86.

Applicant's OPR profile since 1990 follows:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION

      18 Apr 90              Meets Standards
      19 Apr 91              Meets Standards
      29 Jan 92              Meets Standards
      14 Jul 92              Meets Standards
      14 Jul 93              Meets Standards
      13 Apr 94              Meets Standards
      13 Apr 95              Meets Standards
      13 Apr 96              Meets Standards
      13 Apr 97              Meets Standards
      13 Apr 98              Meets Standards
      13 Apr 99              Meets Standards
      14 Mar 00              Meets Standards
      30 May 01              No Report Available
  #   4 Jan 01               Meets Standards

# Top Report at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the  CY01B  Lieutenant
Colonel Board.

On 6  May  02,  the  applicant  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by an SSB for  the  CY01B
Lieutenant Colonel Board.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPB recommended denial.  They noted that the applicant  had  one
nonselection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel  by  the
CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Board.  On 6 May 02, he was  also  considered
for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by  an  SSB  for  the
CY01B Lieutenant Colonel Board due to a missing OPR from  his  officer
selection record (OSR).

AFPC/DPPB indicated that they do not agree with the applicant that  he
was not selected for promotion to  the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel
because the CY01B discriminated against Reserve officers.   The  board
members, under oath, were charged to  give  each  record  a  fair  and
equitable  evaluation  using  the  whole  person  concept.   They  are
confident the board members complied with that charge.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial indicating that the  AFPC/DPPB  advisory
addressed the applicant’s contention of discrimination against Reserve
officers.   However,  their  role  is  not  to  substantiate   whether
discrimination occurred, but rather to review  the  evidence  provided
and  determine  whether  reports  were  rendered  and  processes  were
followed fairly, accurately, and in  accordance  with  the  applicable
instruction.  The applicant has not provided  conclusive  evidence  to
show his record contained comments and recommendations that  were  not
rendered in good faith by evaluators based on the knowledge  available
at the time.  Therefore,  there  was  no  basis  for  granting  direct
promotion.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommended denial indicating that it is  axiomatic  that  the
applicant bears the burden of proof before the AFBCMR that an error or
injustice has occurred requiring a correction  of  records.   In  this
case, the applicant has offered only his opinion that the reason  that
he was nonselected by the central board was his status as a Reservist,
and that such a criterion--if utilized in whole or in part--denied him
fair and equal treatment as mandated by  the  law  and  governing  Air
Force directives.  He has offered no evidence to support that opinion.
 In the absence of proof to the contrary, the selection board  members
are presumed to have properly discharged their duties in  good  faith,
without prejudice, and in accordance with  their  instructions  (which
include the obligation of fair  and  equitable  consideration  of  all
candidates) and applicable  regulations.   As  a  consequence,  it  is
AFPC/JA’s opinion that the applicant has failed to provide  sufficient
evidence of probable error or injustice warranting relief.

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant provided a response indicating  that  he  did  not  wish  to
restate the information he presented in his original appeal because he
feels that he has presented clear and compelling evidence that he  was
not promoted due to Reserve discrimination.  He  requested  additional
evidence from AFPC but he was denied the information.   In  his  view,
the information would have strengthened his case but is not  necessary
to prove that the  CY01B  board  engaged  in  discriminatory  behavior
against Reserve component officers.  He contends that his situation is
one where the SSB process is unworkable, and  that  the  only  way  he
could receive fair consideration by an SSB, is by  a  Reserve  officer
promotion board.  If a Reserve component SSB is not a  viable  option,
then the only non-discriminatory alternative is  direct  promotion  by
the AFBCMR.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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  warranting  corrective  action
concerning the applicant’s request that he be promoted to the grade of
lieutenant colonel as though selected by the CY01B Lieutenant  Colonel
Board.  The applicant's complete submission  was  thoroughly  reviewed
and his contentions were duly noted.  However,  we  do  not  find  the
applicant’s assertions and the documentation provided  in  support  of
his appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale  provided
by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR).  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 he was not  selected  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel because he was the victim  of  discrimination.   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.  We did also note that he was  given  SSB  consideration  for
promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY01B board  as  a
result of a missing OPR from his officer selection  record.   However,
he was not selected  for  promotion.   We  are  of  the  opinion  that
consideration by the SSB was proper and fitting relief.   In  view  of
the foregoing, and in  the  absence  of  sufficient  evidence  to  the
contrary, we agree with the recommendation of the OPRs and adopt their
rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed
to sustain his burden of establishing that he has suffered  either  an
error or an injustice.  Accordingly, we find no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application

4.  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   issues   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
02093 in Executive Session on 19 Nov 02, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Panel Chair
      Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member
      Mr. Christopher Carey, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Jun 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPB, dated 12 Jul 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 15 Aug 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 21 Aug 02.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Aug 02.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, applicant, dated 6 Sep 02.




                                   OLGA M. CRERAR
                                   Panel Chair