RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03949
            INDEX CODE:  131.01

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  31 JUN 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He  be  provided  Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)  consideration  for
promotion to the grade of colonel by the Calendar Year  2004W  (CY04W)
Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to circumstances beyond his control, he was unable to complete Air
War College (AWC) prior to the  convening  of  the  CY04W  CSB,  which
affected  his  Promotion  Recommendation  Form  (PRF)  and  negatively
impacted his promotion opportunity.

His CY04W Officer Selection Brief (OSB) only reflected  one  level  of
academic education.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an expanded statement
and other documentation associated with the matter under review.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System  (PDS)  indicates
the applicant is currently serving on active  duty  in  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel, having been promoted to that grade on  1  Jul  99.
His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 16  Jul  82
and his Total Active Federal Commissioned Service Date (TAFCSD)  is  6
Jun 86.

Applicant's  Officer  Performance  Report  (OPR)  profile  since  1995
follows:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION

       8 Mar 95              Meets Standards
       1 Aug 95              Meets Standards
       1 Aug 96              Meets Standards
      25 May 97              Meets Standards
      31 Mar 98              Meets Standards
      31 Mar 99              Meets Standards
      31 Mar 00              Meets Standards
      31 Mar 01              Meets Standards
      31 Mar 02              Meets Standards
      31 Mar 03              Meets Standards
  #   15 Jan 04              Meets Standards
      15 Jan 05              Meets Standards

# Top Report at  the  time  he  was  considered  and  nonselected  for
promotion to the grade of colonel by the CY04W Colonel CSB.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial noting the applicant’s  contention  that
his promotion opportunity was negatively impacted by his inability  to
complete the appropriate Professional Military Education (PME).   They
indicated that eligible officers meeting a board have  the  option  to
submit a letter to the board president addressing any matter of record
concerning  themselves  that  they  believe  is  important  to   their
consideration for  promotion.   As  such,  the  applicant  could  have
written a letter to the board members prior to convening of the board,
not  after  his  nonselection  to  colonel,  informing  them  of   the
circumstances surrounding his noncompletion  of  AWC.   The  applicant
completed AWC after convening of the CY04W CSB; therefore,  this  data
would not be reflected on his CY04W OSB.  Furthermore, the  completion
of AWC is not a requirement for promotion to colonel.   The  Secretary
of the Air Force's Memorandum of Instructions  (MOI)  recited  to  the
CY04W board  members  specifically  instructs  them  to  not  consider
academics/PME as a pass-fail requirement or give  it  disproportionate
weight.  In fact, the MOI stresses the  "whole-person  concept."   The
"whole-person concept"  includes  such  factors  as  job  performance,
professional qualities, leadership, depth and breadth  of  experience,
job   responsibility,   academic/PME,   and   specific   achievements.
Completion of advanced academic education and PME,  like  other  whole
person factors,  must  be  assessed  in  terms  of  how  they  enhance
performance and potential, as well as, contribute to the  mission  and
effectiveness of the Air Force.

Regarding the incorrect academic education  on  the  applicant's  OSB,
AFPC/DPPPO indicated they agree that his bachelor's degree should have
also been reflected on his OSB.  However, each  officer  eligible  for
promotion consideration received an Officer Preselection  Brief  (OPB)
several months prior to the selection board.   The  OPB  contains  the
same data that will appear on the OSB at the central  board.   Written
instructions attached to the OPB and given to the officer  before  the
central selection board specifically  instruct  him/her  to  carefully
examine the brief for completeness and accuracy.  If  any  errors  are
found, he/she must take  corrective  action  prior  to  the  selection
board, not after it.  The instructions specifically  state,  "Officers
will not be considered by a Special Selection Board if, in  exercising
reasonable diligence, the officer should have discovered the error  or
omission in his/her records and could  have  taken  timely  corrective
action."  The applicant was not only considered by the CY04W board in-
the-promotion zone, but the CY02A and CY03A  below-the-promotion  zone
as well without his bachelor's  degree  on  his  OSB.   The  applicant
received OPBs for all three boards, and yet, he failed to  ensure  his
OSB was accurate for three consecutive boards.  In AFPC/DPPPO’s  view,
the applicant has not demonstrated reasonable  diligence  in  ensuring
his record was accurate prior to any of these three selection  boards.


A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPO evaluation, with attachments, is  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  applicant  on  24
Feb 06 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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.   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  presented  in  support  of  his   appeal   sufficiently
persuasive to override the rationale provided by Air Force  office  of
primary responsibility (OPR).  The  applicant  contends  that  due  to
circumstances beyond his control, he was unable to complete AWC  prior
to the convening of the  CY04W  CSB,  which  negatively  affected  his
promotion opportunity.  However, it appears the applicant  could  have
written a letter to the board president prior to the  board  regarding
the circumstances of his noncompletion of AWC.  Additionally, we  note
the completion of AWC is not a requirement for promotion  to  colonel.
Concerning the applicant’s incorrect academic education on his OSB, no
evidence has been presented which has shown to  our  satisfaction  the
applicant exercised the necessary diligence to ensure that his  record
accurately reflected his academic education.  In this respect, we note
the applicant’s academic  education  was  inaccurately  reflected  for
three consecutive boards.  In  view  of  the  foregoing,  and  in  the
absence of sufficient evidence to the  contrary,  we  agree  with  the
recommendation of the OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our
decision that the applicant  has  failed  to  sustain  his  burden  of
establishing  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 BC-
2005-03949 in Executive Session on 19 Apr 06, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 16 Feb 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Feb 06.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair