RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  02-01858
            INDEX CODE 131.01
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Academic Education section in the Officer  Selection  Brief  (OSB)
for the Calendar Year 2001A (CY01A) central colonel selection board be
updated to reflect completion of the  Advanced  Education  in  General
Dentistry II (AEGDII) residency;  information  in  the  Memorandum  of
Instruction (MOI) pertaining to clinical proficiency to the  selection
board be suppressed; and he be afforded Special Selection Board  (SSB)
consideration.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The ambiguity of the criteria issued in the  information  included  in
the pre-selection brief resulted in his residency not  being  included
on his  OSB.  Had  the  pre-selection  brief  provided  criteria  that
included his residency training, the field would  have  been  updated.
Even though his record clearly indicates completion of this  training,
the board, relying on secondary discriminators, may  have  assumed  he
did not care enough to update this section.  He  wants  to  level  the
playing field by including this training on his OSB. Further, the  MOI
is  in  direct  opposition  to  current  regulations,   policies   and
instructions. The clear thread though all of the policies and guidance
is that leadership or managerial skills should be weighed the same  as
clinical proficiency. The MOI directs that  the  board  will  consider
clinical proficiency and skill as a  health  professional  to  be  the
single most important consideration in selection for promotion through
colonel. An inherent  inequity  was  created  when  a  change  in  the
criteria for promotion occurred without opportunity  for  those  being
considered for promotion to adjust to the change.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel on 2 Jun
96.  He was considered but not selected by the CY01A colonel selection
board, which convened on 22 Oct 01. The Promotion Recommendation  Form
(PRF) has an overall recommendation of “Promote.” His  performance  in
and completion of the two-year AEGD program is reflected in  AF  Forms
475 contained in his selection folder.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ  AFPC/DPMAF2  notes  that  completion  of  the  applicant’s  AEGDII
residency was not indicated on the OSB at the time the board met.  Per
the instruction provided, this training does not fall under any of the
categories listed under Academic Education on the  OSB  and  therefore
would not be listed. Per  the  Chief,  Dental  Corps  Utilization  and
Education Branch, HQ AFPC/DPAMD, the board would have  been  aware  of
the training even thought it wasn’t  listed  on  the  OSB.  Denial  is
recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPB asserts the MOI is written in full compliance with  Title
10, USC, Chapter 36, and DOD Instruction  1320.14.  The  authority  to
change the MOI is outside the scope of this office and  the  AFPC,  as
the Secretary of the Air Force is the only person who is authorized to
furnish written guidance to the board.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPPO concurs with the DPMAF2  and  DPPB  advisories  and  has
nothing further to add. Since DPMAF2 recommends disapproval  regarding
the applicant’s request to update his advanced education on  his  OSB,
SSB consideration is not warranted.  Recommend  SSB  consideration  be
denied.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations  were  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 22 Nov 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. After a thorough  review  of  the
evidence  of  record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that SSB consideration is warranted with an amended OSB. The
applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find  these
uncorroborated  assertions,  in  and   by   themselves,   sufficiently
persuasive to override  the  rationale  provided  by  the  Air  Force.
Completion of  AEGDII  residency  does  not  fall  under  any  of  the
categories listed under Academic Education on the  OSB.  Nevertheless,
the applicant’s training was indicated on the AF Forms  475  contained
in his selection folder; therefore, the information was  available  to
the selection board members. The  applicant  has  not  shown  the  MOI
during the contested time period was not in compliance with statute or
governing directive, or that the Secretary of the Air Force’s  written
guidance to promotion boards was unauthorized  or  the  cause  of  his
nonselection. We therefore adopt the  Air  Force’s  rationale  as  the
basis for our decision that the applicant has failed  to  sustain  his
burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view  of
the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we  conclude
this appeal should be denied.
_________________________________________________________________

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 11 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                  Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Billy Baxter, Member
                  Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-
01858 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 May 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPMAF2, dated 3 Jul 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPB, dated 7 Aug 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 18 Nov 02.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Nov 02.




                                   DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                   Panel Chair