RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03302

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His nonselection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by  the  9
September  2002  Special  Selection  Board   be   overturned   and   he   be
retroactively promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His in the zone (IPZ) board officer performance report (OPR)  and  promotion
recommendation form (PRF) were corrected  through  the  Air  Force’s  appeal
process.  As a result, the HQ AFMC Management  Level  Review  board  awarded
him a definitely promote (DP) recommendation, and  AFPC  granted  a  special
selection board (SSB) consideration for the CY99B Lieutenant Colonel  Board.


The SSB that convened on 9 September 2002 did not select him  for  promotion
despite the DP recommendation.  After he received notification of the  SSB’s
decision, he requested a non-selection counseling teleconference with  AFPC.
 During that teleconference (22 Apr 03), he asked why a candidate with a  DP
would  not  be  promoted.   He  was  told  the  SSB   disregarded   the   DP
recommendation because they viewed any recommendation achieved  through  the
appeal process as “non-competitive.”  Instead they  scrutinized  his  record
as if there were no promotion recommendation.

The Air Force instituted the PRF to give local commanders  more  say  as  to
which officers deserve promotion and  which  do  not.   Because  his  record
contained significant errors and omissions, he was unable to  receive  a  DP
recommendation at the original MLR held in 1999.  After  he  discovered  the
errors and had his rater and rating official correct them,  AFMC  replicated
the original MLR and awarded a DP.  AFPC’s  own  promotion  statistics  show
that 100 percent of the DP candidates who met the CY99B  Lieutenant  Colonel
board were selected for promotion.

If there had been no significant errors and omissions on  his  IPZ  OPR  and
PRF, he would have met the CY99B board with a DP  recommendation.   The  SSB
should have treated the DP recommendation exactly the same as it was by  the
CY99B central selection board.
In support of his request applicant has submitted a copy  of  AF  Form  948,
Applicant for Correction/Removal of  Evaluation  Reports,  copy  of  letters
from the previous MLR  President,  commander,  and  supervisor,  PRF  and  a
promotion selection data sheet.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the  grade  of
major.

Applicant was considered and non-selected for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by the Calendar Years  1999B,  2000A,  2001B,  2002B  and
2003A, Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Boards.

On 22 January 2001, he was considered and non-selected by the CY99B  Special
Selection Board (SSB)  with  a  25  April  1999  corrected  OPR;  and  on  9
September 2002, he was considered and non- selected by the CY99B  SSB,  with
a corrected PRF.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO, reviewed applicant's request and recommends  denial  and  states
that if the applicant is requesting direct promotion we want  to  point  out
that 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  SSBs.   To  grant  direct  promotion  would  be
unfair to all other officers who  have  extremely  competitive  records  and
also did not get promoted.  Without access to all the competing records  and
an appreciation of their content, we 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  where  SSB  consideration  has  been
deemed to be totally unworkable.  The applicant’s record  does  not  warrant
direct promotion, nor does it warrant further SSB consideration.

The applicant’s assertion is flawed.  He  feels  he  was  not  selected  for
promotion  by  the  SSB  because  it  did  not  give   proper   weight   and
consideration to the “DP” received on his PRF as the CSB panel members  gave
to eligible officers with “DPs” on their PRFs.  His revised PRF with a  “DP”
was not competitively earned.  To assume he was nonselected by an  SSB  with
a “DP” PRF versus the notion that he would have been selected by a CSB  with
a “DP” is inaccurate.  It implies that 100 percent  of  CSB  eligibles  with
“DP” PRF are selected while  no  SSB  eligibles  with  “DPs”  are  selected.
Although small in numbers, it is not uncommon for considerees that have  met
CSBs/SSBs and who were awarded a “DP” to be nonselected.  In the opinion  of
the SSB members, they clearly felt that the  officer’s  record  was  not  of
promotable quality even with a “DP” PRF.

AFPC/DPPPO complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 19 Dec 2003, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date,  no
response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice warranting  retroactive  promotion  to
the grade  of  lieutenant  colonel.   After  a  thorough  review  of  the
documentation  provided  in  support  of  his  application,  we  are  not
persuaded that he has been the victim of an injustice.  Evidence has  not
been presented which would lead us to  believe  that  his  senior  raters
promotion  recommendation  was  ignored  or  that  he  was   denied   the
opportunity to compete successfully for promotion on a fair and equitable
basis.  In this  respect,  we  note  that  a  direct  promotion  is  only
considered  in   the   most   extraordinary   circumstances   where   SSB
consideration has been deemed to be totally  unworkable.   Therefore,  we
agree with the opinion and recommendation of  the  Air  Force  office  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.  Therefore, in the absence of 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 probable 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  BC-2003-03302
in Executive Session on 17 February 2004, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:


                 Ms. Marilyn Thomas, Vice Chair
                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
                 Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Oct 03, w/Atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 9 Dec 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MBBR, dated 19 Dec 03.





                                   MARILYN THOMAS
                                   Vice Chair