RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03765
                                             INDEX CODE:  131.00
      XXXXXXX                           COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  13 May 2007


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to the grade of colonel and allowed to complete 30  years  of
total active service.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has been denied an opportunity to fairly compete  for  promotion  to  the
grade of colonel and the only way to resolve the situation is to direct  his
promotion through the correction of records process.

As a result of previous corrections to his  records,  he  was  retroactively
promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel and considered for promotion  to
the grade of colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB).  However, based  on
the retroactive promotion, he lost the opportunity to serve  in  the  higher
grade and to build a competitive record as a  lieutenant  colonel  prior  to
promotion consideration to the grade of colonel.  As such, at  the  time  of
his promotion consideration to colonel,  his  top  evaluation  reports  were
that of a major and he had not served  in  any  positions  as  a  lieutenant
colonel.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a letter of recommendation  from
his former  commander  and  copies  of  his  Officer  Effectiveness  Reports
(OERs).

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Based on  two  nonselections  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  lieutenant
colonel, the applicant was originally retired on 1 June 1984, in  the  grade
of major.

Based on previous corrections  to  his  record,  on  2  November  1999,  the
overall  evaluation  of  a  1977  Officer  Effectiveness  Report  (OER)  was
upgraded and the applicant was considered and selected for promotion to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by a  Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)  for  the
Calendar Year 1978A (CY 78A) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.   Based  on
his selection for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by  the  SSB,
he was considered for promotion to the grade of colonel by an  SSB  for  the
CY 83 Colonel Selection Board.  He was not selected  for  promotion  by  the
SSB for the CY 83 Colonel Board.

On 17 April 2002, the Board favorably  considered  the  applicant’s  request
that he be retired in the grade of lieutenant colonel effective  1  November
1991.  For an accounting of the  facts  and  circumstances  surrounding  the
application, and the rationale of the earlier decision  by  the  Board,  see
the Third Addendum to Record of Proceedings at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied and  states,  in  part,  the
results of the SSB for the CY 83 Colonel Board  were  based  on  a  complete
review of the  applicant’s  entire  selection  record  documenting  service,
assessing  whole  person  factors  such  as  job  performance,  professional
qualities, depth and  breadth  of  experience,  leadership,  and  education.
Although the officer may be qualified for promotion, he may not be the  best
qualified of other eligible officers competing for  the  limited  number  of
promotion vacancies in  the  judgment  of  a  selection  board  vested  with
discretionary authority to make such selection.

The AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  17
February 2006, for review and comment, within 30 days.  On  21  March  2006,
the application was temporarily withdrawn at the applicant’s request.  In  a
letter, dated 7 June  2006,  the  applicant  requested  his  application  be
reopened and provided the following comments in response to the evaluation.

The SSB was unable to re-create the original board competition  because  all
of the benchmark records were those of lieutenant colonels  and  his  record
was that of a major,  with  no  assignments  or  performance  reports  as  a
lieutenant colonel.  His record could not have been aged  since  his  recent
assignments and performance reports were that of a major.  In view of  this,
it would have been obvious that his record was that of  the  consideree  and
not a benchmark record.  Furthermore, there was no way the board could  have
evaluated his  command/staff  leadership,  the  scope/exposure  of  his  job
responsibility,  etc,  under  the  whole  person  concept.   Based  on   the
foregoing,  he  wrote  a  letter  to  the  SSB  president   explaining   the
circumstances surrounding the unusual condition of his record.  However,  he
was still not selected for promotion by the SSB.   If  the  Board  favorably
considers his request, it would not be unfair to those  lieutenant  colonels
that were not selected for promotion to the  grade  of  colonel  since  they
were not deprived of fair and equitable promotion consideration, as was he.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest  of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

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.   In  1999,  the
applicant’s records were corrected by removing his OER  closing  31 December
1977 and promotion consideration by an SSB which resulted in  his  selection
for promotion to lieutenant colonel with a date of rank of 18 May 1979.   In
2002, the Board favorably considered his request to retire as  a  lieutenant
colonel on 1 November 1991, with 28 years of  active  commissioned  service.
He now requests direct promotion to colonel and to be  allowed  to  complete
30 years of total active service.  We do not take issue  with  the  argument
that the previous corrections placed him at a  disadvantage  when  competing
against his peers who had a substantiated record of  performance.   This  is
indeed unfortunate.  However, the Board notes that had he sought  correction
of the OER in a more  timely  manner,  which  resulted  in  his  retroactive
promotion to lieutenant colonel, he most likely would have been promoted  by
the original board and would not be in the position he  finds  himself.   We
recognize that in all cases, we cannot make  an  officer  completely  whole.
Therefore we strive to provide substantial equity.  In this regard, we  note
the applicant has benefited from the correction of records process by  being
retired in the higher grade of lieutenant colonel effective 1 November  1991
with maximum service.  Based on the totality of  the  circumstances  of  the
case, including the fact  that  the  officer’s  lack  of  due  diligence  in
pursuing correction of his OER was a factor in this matter, we conclude  the
applicant has been provided substantial equity; and that further  relief  is
not appropriate.

________________________________________________________________

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  BC-2005-03765
in Executive Session on 13 July 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Barbara J. White-Olsen, Member
                       Mr. Charles E. Bennett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  3rd Addendum ROP, dated 5 Jun 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 7 Feb 06.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 06.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Mar 06.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Mar 06.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Jun 06, w/atchs.




                                   CHARLES E. BENNETT
                                   Panel Chair